UC-NRLF 


71    710 


LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA. 

RECEIVED    BY   EXCHANGE 


Class 


AN  APPLE  ORCHARD  SURVEY 

OF 

NIAGARA  COUNTY 
NEW  YORK 


A  THESIS 

PRESENTED  TO  THE  FACULTY  OF  THE  GRADUATE  SCHOOL 
OF  CORNELL  UNIVERSITY  FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF 

DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY 


BY 

MARSHALL  BAXTER   CUMMINGS 


[Reprinted  from  Bulletin  262,  Cornell  University  Experiment  Station.] 


JANUARY,  1909  BULLETIN  262 

CORNELL  UNIVERSITY 

AGRICULTURAL  EXPERIMENT  STATION  OF 

THE    COLLEGE    OF    AGRICULTURE 

Department  of  Horticulture 

APPLE  ORCHARD  SURVEY 

OF 

NIAGARA  COUNTY 

Under  the  Direction  of 
JOHN  CRAIG 


BIT  M  ^:  CtTMMlNGS 


ITHACA,  N.  Y. 
PUBLISHED  BY  THE  UNIVERSITY 


ORGANIZATION 

OF  THE  CORNELL  UNIVERSITY  AGRICULTURAL  EXPERIMENT 
STATION. 


BOARD  OF  CONTROL  ^ 

THE  TRUSTEES  OF  THE  UNIVERSITY 


THE    AGRICULTURAL    COLLEGE    AND    STATION    COUNCIL 

JACOB  GOULD  SCHURMAN,  President  of  the  University. 

ROBERT  H.  TREMAN,  Trustee  of  the  University. 

LIBERTY  H.  BAILEY,  Director  of  the  College  and  Experiment  Station. 

EMMONS  L.  WILLIAMS,  Treasurer  of  the  University. 

JOHN  H.  COMSTOCK,  Professor  of  Entomology. 

HENRY  H.  WING,  Professor  of  Animal  Husbandry. 


EXPERIMENTING    STAFF 

LIBERTY  H.  BAILEY,  Director. 

JOHN  HENRY  COMSTOCK,  Entomology. 

HENRY  H.  WING,  Animal  Husbandry. 

JOHN  CRAIG,  Horticulture. 

T.  LYTTLETON  LYON,  Soil  Investigations. 

H.  J.  WEBBER,  Plant-Breeding. 

B.  M.  DUGGAR,  Plant  Physiology. 
JOHN  L.  STONE,  Farm  Practice. 
JAMES  E.  RICE,  Poultry  Husbandry. 
MARK  V.  SLINGERLAND,  Entomology. 
GEORGE  W.  CAVANAUGH,  Chemistry. 
ELMER  O.  FIPPIN,  Soils. 

W.  A.  STOCKING,  Jr.,  Dairy  Bacteriology. 
HERBERT  H.  WHETZEL,  Plant  Pathology. 
G.  F.  WARREN,   Farm  Crops. 
LOWELL  B.  JUDSON,  Horticulture. 
CHARLES  S.  WILSON,  Horticulture. 
M.  W.  HARPER,  Animal  Husbandry. 
CHARLES  F.  CLARK,  Agronomy. 
JAMES   A.    BIZZELL,  Sail  Investigations. 

C.  A.  PUBLOW,  Dairy  Industry. 
CYRUS  R.  CROSBY,  Entomology. 

C.  A.  ROGERS,  Poultry  Husbandry. 
P.  J.  WHITE,  Farm  Crops. 

D.  REDDICK,  Bl«mt'Pathok>g.y,  .  ..  :    t 

E.  R.  MINNS,  Farhr  .Practice,*    :  :•':  :.,: 

G.  A.  CRABB,4SQils.. .•. 

E.  S.  GUTHRIE,:  Buitfefitic&hf^     !  -V-  .  : 
M.  F.  BARRUSV  Plant  '  Pathology" 

M.  B.  CUMMINGS,  Horticulture. 

The  regular  bulletins  of  the  Station  are  sent  free  to  persons  residing  in  New 
York  State  who  request  them. 


Apple  Orchard  Survey  of  Niagara  County* 

INTRODUCTION 
BY  JOHN  CRAIG 

The  active  campaign  was  commenced  in  July,  1905,  by  the  writer, 
assisted  by  Messrs.  C.  S.  Wilson  and  G.  W.  Hosford.  The  first  orchard 
examined  was  the  peach  orchard  of  the  late  Dr.  Charles  A.  Ring  on 
the  Lake  Road.  Dr.  Ring  was  a  prime  agitator  for  the  institution  of 
this  work  in  Niagara  County  and  extended  the  hospitality  of  his  home 
for  more  than  a  week  to  the  three  persons  who  began  the  work.  Other 


FIG.  26. — A  general  view  of  the  topography  of  the  Lake  Road  region,  Niagara  County 

persons  who  kindly  aided  the  survey  in  the  same  way  in  order  to  econ- 
omize funds,  were  Messrs.  W.  T.  Mann,  L.  and  Frank  Bradley  of 
Barkers;  S.  W.  McCollum  and  F.  R.  Wheeler  of  Lockport.  Kindly 
cooperation  was  also  rendered  by  Albert  Eighme,  George  Pomeroy, 
Willard  Hopkins,  Frank  Hall,  Frank  Balmer  and  John  Witmer.  Indeed, 
the  fruit  growers  of  the  county  generally  should  be  thanked  for  the 
generous  way  in  which  they  responded  to  our  requests  for  data  and 
general  information. 

The  following  orchard  inspectors  were  employed  during  the  seasons 
of  1905  and  1906:  Messrs.  J.  E.  Coit,  C.  D.  Jarvis,  J.  E.  Howitt,  C.  F. 
Kinman,  J.  P.  Stewart,  C.  F.  and  L.  A.  Niven.  The  work  was  finally 
completed  by  the  author  of  this  bulletin,  M.  B.  Cummings,  in  1907. 

*  Printed  January,  1909,  but  withdrawn  for  reexamination  of  statistics.  Re- 
vised and  reprinted  for  distribution  May,  1910. — J.  C. 

279 

226913 


280  .\  i  t  /  1  >  •  {  J  l  "  ^'LisTitf  262. 


Cooperation  by  the  Bureau  of  Soils.  At  the  inception  of  the  orchard 
examination,  the  desirability  of  adding  to  its  completeness  by  securing 
a  survey  of  soil  conditions  was  immediately  recognized.  The  matter  was 
presented  to  the  Chief  of  the  Bureau  of  Soils  through  whose  kind  coop- 
eration a  soil  survey  was  authorized  and  completed  in  the  summer  of 
1906  under  the  immediate  direction  of  Professor  E.  O.  Pippin.  The 
full  text  of  this  examination  is  set  forth  in  the  eighth  Report  of  the 
Field  Operations  of  the  Bureau  of  Soils,  1906,  pages  69  to  117.  Copies 
of  the  bound  volumes  of  the  soil  survey  are  on  sale  by  the  Superintend- 
ent of  Documents,  Government  Printing  Office,  Washington,  D.  C. 
Separate  copies  of  soil  surveys  may  be  secured  by  applying  to  the  Bureau 
of  Soils,  except  when  the  supply  is  exhausted. 

HISTORICAL  NOTES 

In  1779,  a  large  tract  of  country  in  the  western  part  of  New  York 
was  set  off  and  styled  Ontario.  This  embraced  the  entire  region  lying 
between  the  two  lakes,  including  Steuben,  Ontario,  Yates,  Allegany, 
Cattaraugus,  Livingston,  Chautauqua,  Erie,  Orleans,  Wyoming,  Gene- 
see,  Wayne,  Monroe  and  Niagara  Counties.  The  subdivisions  which 
erected  these  counties  were  made  between  1779  and  1854,  Niagara 
being  separated  from  the  group  in  1808.  At  this  time,  Buffalo  was 
little  more  than  a  village,  Niagara  County  mostly  in  timber,  and  the 
old  Ridge  Road  unopened. 

Fruit-growing  has  been  associated  with  the  progress  of  this  county 
from  its  earliest  settlement.  It  is  recorded  that  Indian  orchards  existed 
here  in  the  regions  occupied  by  the  Senecas  and  the  Oneidas.  The 
Sullivan  expedition  against  the  warlike  tribes  in  western  New  York  in 
1779,  caused  the  destruction  of  thousands  of  fruit  trees.  Miss  Stites,  the 
author  of  the  "  Economics  of  the  Iroquois,"  says  : 

"  The  apple  is  the  Iroqouis  banana.  From  the  earliest  introduction 
of  this  fruit  into  New  York  and  into  New  France  from  the  genial  plains 
of  Holland  and  Normandy,  these  tribes  appear  to  have  been  captivated 
by  its  taste  and  they  lost  no  time  in  transferring  it,  by  sowing  the  seed, 
to  the  sites  of  their  ancient  castles.  No  one  can  read  the  accounts  of 
the  destruction  of  their  extensive  orchards  of  the  apple,  which  were 
cut  down  on  General  Sullivan's  inroad  into  the  Genesee  country  in 
1779,  without  regretting  that  the  purposes  of  war  should  require  this 
barbaric  act.  The  Census  (of  Schoolcraft)  will  show  that  this  taste 
remains  as  strong  in  1845  as  ^  was  sixty-six  years  ago.  Upwards  of 
four  thousand  fruit  trees  were  counted  in  the  Senecas'  territory  alone 


APPLE  ORCHARD  SURVEY  OF  NIAGARA  COUNTY. 


281 


(1845),  anc*  the  Tuscaroras  (this  tribe  occupied  the  present  site  of  Ni- 
agara County)  had  over  fifteen  hundred  fruit  trees." 

Apple-orcharding. — Apple-tree  planting  in  Niagara  County  began, 
as  it  did  in  New  England  and  the  older  states,  by  first  setting  out  seed- 
ling trees.  Many  of  these  were  subsequently  top-grafted.  There  were 
practically  three  eras  in  the  apple-orcharding  history  of  western  New 
York:  First,  the  era  of  seedling  apples;  second,  the  era  of  top-grafting, 
when  these  were  worked  over  to  named  varieties  from  New  England ;  and 


FIG.  27. — A  part  of  the  lawn  surrounding  the  residence  of  Mr.  W.  T.  Mann 

third,  the  era  which  marked  the  establishment  of  the  great  commercial 
orchards  of  today,  and  the  planting  of  Greening,  Baldwin,  Spy,  and 
the  like. 

Early  nurseries. —  It  is  recorded  in  Turner's  history  of  Niagara  County 
(1878,  page  232)  that  in  1813,  one  Jairus  Rose,  living  near  Sanborn, 
sowed  two  acres  of  land  to  apple  seed,  thus  starting  the  first  nursery 
in  the  county.  The  young  trees  were  distributed  throughout  the  settled 
parts  of  the  county.  The  price  of  these  seedling  trees  was  twelve  cents 
each.  It  would  be  very  interesting  to  know  whether  this  distribution 
of  seedlings  did  not  give  rise  to  some  important  local  varieties  peculiar 
to  western  New  York. 

Among  other  nurseries  established  was  that  of  Dr.  William  Townshend, 
near  Lockport,  about  1830.  S.  Cudaback  and  Timothy  Cutwater 


282  BULLETIN  262. 

maintained  a  nursery  on  the  Lake  Road  between  Wilson  and  Olcott 
about  the  same  time. 

In  1839,  Elisha  Moody  established  a  nursery  on  the  Ridge  Road 
northeast  of  Lockport.  The  founder  was  the  first  president  of  the 
American  Association  of  Nurserymen.  The  original  firm  has  been  con- 
tinued by  E.  Moody  &  Sons  now  in  business  at  Lockport. 

Messrs.  Penfield  and  Burrell,  of  Lockport,  were  also  in  business  be- 
tween 1850  and  1865,  at  the  time  when  there  was  considerable  activity  in 
the  planting  of  orchards.  To  these  early  nurserymen  the  county  is  largely 
indebted  for  the  large  commercial  orchards  now  in  bearing. 

VALUABLE    FRUITS    ORIGINATING    IN    NIAGARA    COUNTY 

Niagara  County  has  given  to  the  State  and  the  Nation  some  valuable 
varieties  of  fruit.  The  varieties  noted  below  include  only  those  which 
are  of  more  than  local  significance. 

Niagara  peach. —  Like  many  good  things,  there  is  some  obscurity 
as  to  the  origin  of  this  peach.  Two  men  in  the  town  of  New  fane,  this 
county  (Niagara),  claim  its  discovery,  but  the  most  probable  story 
of  its  origin  is  given  as  fellows  by  J.  S.  Woodward,  Lockport: 

"  Fifteen  or  more  years  ago,  Mr.  P.  H.  Corwin  began  to  grow  peach 
trees  for  sale  in  a  small  way.  In  an  orchard  of  Early  Crawford  from 
which  he  was  taking  buds,  he  noticed  a  very  vigorous  tree  that  bore  very 
nice  large  peaches,  and  naturally  he  cut  a  good  many  buds  from  this 
tree.  When  the  trees  he  sold  began  to  bear,  the  owner  noticed  a  marked 
difference  in  the  fruit  on  different  trees  and  made  inquiry  of  Mr.  Corwin 
as  to  the  cause.  This  led  to  close  inspection  of  the  orchard  from  which 
the  buds  had  been  cut  and  established  the  fact  that  there  was  a  variety 
very  distinct  from  Early  Crawford.  In  1894,  Mr.  Corwin  began  to  prop- 
agate this  as  a  new  sort,  and  at  first  called  it  Mammoth  Crawford ; 
but  as  this  would  lead  to  a  confusion  of  names,  Niagara  was  substituted 
and  today  it  is  known  by  no  other  name.  The  tree  is  a  more  vigorous 
grower,  with  heavier  and  darker  green  leaves  and  more  stocky  wood 
than  the  Crawford ;  nor  does  it  load  on  as  much  fruit  as  the  Crawford 
at  its  best.  It  begins  to  ripen  about  one  picking  later  than  Crawford, 
and  the  fruit  is  larger,  more  round  and  of  better  quality  than  the  Craw- 
ford and  holds  out  good  in  size  to  the  last.  Anyone  going  through  an 
orchard  of  Crawfords  with  a  few  Niagaras  mixed  in,  has  no  difficulty 
in  distinguishing  the  variety  even  when  there  is  no  fruit  on  the  trees." 

Niagara  grape. —  The  Niagara  white  grape  is  one  of  the  leading  com- 
mercial grapes  of  the  state.  It  originated  in  1872  with  the  nursery  firm 
cf  Hoag  and  Clark  of  Lockport,  N.  Y.  It  is  the  product  of  a  cross  of 
Concord  and  Cassidy  described  as  follows  by  the  originators : 


APPLE  ORCHARD  SURVEY  OF  NIAGARA  COUNTY.  283 

Hardy,  healthy,  vigorous  and  productive;  wood  rather  long  jointed; 
leaves  large,  thick,  leathery  and  downy,  often  double-lobed ;  bunch 
medium  to  large,  8  to  14  ounces  in  weight,  compact  and  often  shouldered ; 
berry  large,  roundish  to  oval,  uniform  in  size,  with  tough  but  thin 
skin,  pale  green  changing  to  yellow  when  fully  ripe ;  flesh  soft,  tender, 
sweet  and  pleasant,  and  of  good  quality.  This  grape  has  attained  a 
permanent  place  as  the  leading  white  grape  of  Ohio,  New  Jersey  and 
New  York,  and  is  extensively  planted  in  the  grape  districts  of  central 
and  western  New  York. 

Somerset  apple. —  The  Somerset  is  reported  as  having  originated  in  the 
town  of  Somerset.  It  was  first  brought  to  notice  by  'C.  L.  Hoag  of  Lock- 
port.  Somerset  is  an  early  apple  of  sprightly  flavor,  and  considered  good 
for  family  use.  The  fruit  is  somewhat  below  medium,  roundish  conical 
in  shape  and  of  a  deep  golden-yellow  color.  The  flesh  is  nearly  white, 
tender,  juicy,  with  a  rich  aromatic  flavor.  The  quality  is  very  good. 
The  tree  is  upright  and  spreading  in  its  growth.  Somerset  is  especially 
noted  for  its  earliness.  It  is  said  to  be  very  productive. 

Pomeroy  English  walnuts. —  These  were  introduced  into  Niagara 
County  in  1876.  Norman  Pomeroy  brought  several  walnuts  home  with 
him  from  the  Centennial  at  Philadelphia  and  planted  them  in  his  garden 
in  Lockport.  From  these  native-grown  nuts  he  raised  a  number  of 
trees.  Several  varieties  were  obtained,  and  the  best  one  "was  named 
by  H.  E.  VanDeman  the  Pomeroy  walnut.  This  variety  has  proved 
hardy  and  productive,  and  each  year  the  nuts  are  saved  for  nursery 
plantings.  A.  C.  Pomeroy  is  now  in  charge  of  the  walnut  nursery. 

THE   OUTLOOK 

That  this  is  encouraging,  there  is  no  question  whatever.  The  pro- 
gressive, prudent  apple  grower  of  Niagara  County  should  be,  and  is, 
prosperous.  Notable  examples  of  successes  by  men  who  engaged  in  the 
business  under  exceedingly  unfavorable  circumstances  are  not  rare. 
When  failure  has  occurred,  it  may  usually  be  charged  to  one  or  all  of 
the  following  causes :  lack  of  capital,  enterprise  or  knowledge,  and 
extensive  rather  than  intensive  efforts.  The  bane  of  many  beginners 
is  insufficiency  of  capital,  but  this  is  not  so  fatal  as  inadequate  knowl- 
edge. Then,  many  beginners  develop  too  rapidly.  A  slow,  steady  growth 
is  much  better  than  a  rapid,  unhealthy  growth.  Niagara  County  pos- 
sesses substantial  natural  advantages  for  growing  fine  apples.  Much 
of  the  soil  is  admirably  adapted,  the  climate  is  favorably  tempered  by 
proximity  to  Lake  Ontario.  A  large  and  growing  market  is  near  at  hand, 
while  the  transportation  facilities  are  much  better  than  the  average. 


284 


BULLETIN  262. 


What,  then,  is  needed?  Better  care  of  existing  orchards;  renova- 
tion of  some  orchards  declining  under  present  management;  the  plant- 
ing of  new  orchards  with  high-grade  varieties  and  their  cultivation  after 
the  most  approved  methods ;  and,  finally,  picking,  packing  and  market- 
ing the  fruit  in  a  thoroughly  business-like  manner. 

The  new  apple  regions  of  the  Northwest  Pacific  are  successfully 
competing,  and  in  some  degree  securing  the  cream  of  the  returns  in  the 
markets  of  the  east.  There  is  no  question  in  regard  to  the  innate  ability 


FIG.  28. — A  Niagara  County  homestead.     Residence  of  the  late  Dr.  Ring 

of  the  east  to  grow  fruit  of  high  quality,  but  so  much  of  the  grading 
and  packing  is  faulty  that  the  reputation  of  the  entire  product  is  thereby 
injured. 

The  native  as  well  as  the  introduced  enemies  of  the  apple  are  no 
longer  seriously  feared  by  the  first-class  grower,  but  the  acme  of  success 
will  not  be  attained  until  Niagara  growers,  in  common  with  the  fruit- 
producers  of  other  great  apple-growing  counties  of  western  New  York, 
reorganize  and  remodel  in  large  measure  present  methods  of  finishing 
and  handling  their  principal  orchard  product.  That  such  a  reorgani- 
zation of  method  is  now  taking  place  and  will  go  on  rapidly  in  the  future 
is  conceded. 


APPLE  ORCHARD  SURVEY  OF  NIAGARA  COUNTY 


GENERAL  STATEMENT  AND  RESULTS* 

BY  M.  B.  CUMMINGS 

This  bulletin  is  the  product  of  field  studies  of  apple  orchards  in  Niagara 
County.  It  is  a  long  story  briefly  told.  The  purpose,  however,  is  to 
present  the  facts  in  regard  to  orchard  management  in  Niagara  County. 
It  is  a  contribution  of  knowledge  to  the  actual  status  of  the  apple  in- 
dustry of  New  York  State.  Contrasts  and  comparisons  with  condi- 
tions in  Orleans  (Bull.  No.  229)  and  Wayne  (Bull.  No.  226)  Counties 
can  be  made.  The  careful  reader  will  find  in  the  tables  presented  here- 
with, material  for  extensive  studies.  It  would  be  interesting  if  each  fruit 
grower  would  study  these  tables  in  relation  to  his  own  orchard. 

Detailed  descriptions  of  apple  enemies  and  factors  of  orchard  manage- 
ment are  omitted.  For  a  full  discussion  of  these  subjects  the  reader 
should  consult  Bulletin  226,  entitled  "An  Apple  Survey  of  Wayne 
County,"  which  is  an  exhaustive  treatise  of  general  apple-orchard 
problems. 

Methods  of  work. —  The  field  studies  were  made  in  a  manner  very 
similar  to  that  of  previous  surveys.  The  canvasser  was  provided  with 
camera,  note-book,  bicycle,  etc.  The  computations  for  yields  and 
prices  were  based  only  on  bearing  orchards.  In  all  cases,  three  bushels 
constitute  a  barrel.  Only  a  few  parts  of  the  county  were  omitted. 
With  the  exception  of  Wheatfield,  Pendleton,  Royalton,  and  parts  of 
Hartland,  the  entire  county  was  surveyed.  A  few  orchards  as  small 
as  three  acres  were  canvassed,  although  most  of  them  of  less  than  five 
acres  were  omitted.  Thus,  although  many  little  orchards  were  left  out 
large  family  orchards  were  included  in  this  survey. 

Size  of  the  industry. —  In  1890,  according  to  the  census  report,  Niagara 
County  had  1,033,454  apple  trees  of  bearing  age,  which  was  the  largest 


*  The  orchard  survey  campaign.  —  This  bulletin  is  the  third  in  the  series  of 
orchard  survey  bulletins.  The  first  two  on  the  apple-growing  of  Wayne  and 
Orleans  Counties  quickly  ran  out  of  print,  attesting  their  usefulness  in  a  very 
satisfactory  way.  The  data  for  three  additional  surveys  are  in  course  of  prepara- 
tion. These  cover  Monroe,  Orange  and  Ontario  Counties.  Other  surveys  will  be 
undertaken  as  time  and  means  permit. 

285 


286 


BULLETIN  262. 


number  of  any  county  in  the  State.  In  1900,  this  number  was  reduced 
to  924,086,  which  was  still  considerable  above  that  of  any  other  county 
in  New  York.  A  more  recent  census  would  undoubtedly  show  still 
greater  reduction  in  the  number  of  trees.  With  respect  to  yields  for 
the  year  1889,  Niagara  ranked  second,  producing  623,204  bushels 
of  apples,  and  was  exceeded  only  by  Wayne  County.  For  the  year 
1899,  Niagara  produced  1,421,796  bushels  and  still  ranked  second,  being 
exceeded  only  by  Monroe  with  an  excess  of  14,595  bushels. 


FIG.  29. — An  old  story:     An  example  of  an  orchard  in  which  the  trees  are  crowding 
each  oilier  and  are  now  "  -fighting  it  out  " 

Area  In  apples. —  The  entire  area  of  the  county  comprises  522  square 
miles,  or  334,080  acres,  with  an  average  of  46  acres  in  apples  to  the 
square  mile.  Furthermore,  since  there  are  924,086  trees  in  the  county, 
and  since  the  average  number  of  trees  per  acre  is  38.2  it  follows  that 
there  are  about  24,190  acres  in  apples.  This  means  that  7.2  per  cent 
of  the  area  of  the  county  is  planted  to  apple  orchards.  About  three- 
fourths  of  the  orchards  are  in  the  northern  half  of  the  county.  More 
complete  surveys  were  made  in  the  lake-shore  districts  than  elsewhere, 
although  representative  districts  of  the  entire  county  were  surveyed. 


APPLE  ORCHARD  SURVEY  OF  NIAGARA  COUNTY. 


Physiography* —  Niagara  County  measures  about  18  by  29  miles,  and 
embraces  an  area  of  522  square  miles.  It  includes  parts  of  two  rather 
distinct  topographical  regions.  The  northern  part  is  the  old  lake  bed, 
often  called  the  Ontario  plain,  which  extends  from  the  lake  to  the  base 
of  the  escarpment;  and  the  ridge  region,  embracing  the  Niagara  escarp- 
ment and  a  part  of  the  Erie  plain,  extending  as  far  south  as  North 
Tonawanda,  and  east  through  Lockport,  and  even  farther. 

The  county  is  rather  flat,  aside  from  the  ridge  and  its  immediate 
vicinity.  There  is  a  slight,  but  rather  general  slope  in  the  northern 


FIG.  30. — A  Baldwin  orchard  on  the  Lake  Road  showing  a  good  cover-crop  of 

mammoth  clover 

part  toward  the  lake,  and  in  the  southern  part  toward  Buffalo  and 
the  south.  There  are  only  a  few  hills  and  a  minimum  of  swamp  area, 
but  considerable  mountain  territory  composed  of  a  very  durable  stratum 
of  Niagara  limestone.  There  are  no  important  rivers,  ponds  or  valleys 
in  the  county.  Much  of  the  land  on  plains  and  on  the  plateau  is  too 
flat  to  allow  of  good  natural  drainage. 

The  Ontario  plain  is  made  up  largely  of  Dunkirk  soils,  such  as  sand  and 
clay  loams.  Such  soils  lend  themselves  easily  to  all  methods  of  tillage, 
and  here  cultivation  is  the  general  practice.  On  the  other  hand,  the  moun- 
tain territory  is,  much  of  it,  too  rough  and  stony  for  thorough  cultivation. 


*  For  fuller  description  see  report  of  field  operations,  Bureau  of  Soils,  1906. 


288 


BULLETIN  262. 


The  climate  is  much  influenced  by  Lake  Ontario.  Cool  and  moist 
winds  from  the  lake  are  modifying  and  unifying  factors.  Local  and 
seasonal  precipitations  are  probably  much  affected  by  proximity  to  the 
lake.  The  temperature  is  doubtless  higher  in  winter  and  lower  in  sum- 
mer because  of  nearness  to  Ontario  waters.  Attention  is  drawn  to  this 
circumstance  by  the  soil  survey  of  the  region,  found  in  the  Report  of 
the  Field  Operations  of  the  Bureau  of  Soils  for  1906,  page  75. 

Age  of  the  orchards. —  The  accompanying  table  is  interesting  in  show- 
ing the  rise  and  decline  of  apple-orchard  planting  in  the  county.  It  is 
quite  probable  that  a  few  orchards  were  planted  previous  to  1820,  but 
no  records  could  be  obtained  to  support  this  idea.  Very  few  orchards 
were  set  before  1855,  and  these  were  small  ones  for  family  rather  than 
commercial  purposes.  Shortly  after  this  date,  however,  large  orchards 
were  put  out,  and  for  a  period  of  thirty-five  years  extensive  plantings 
were  made;  in  fact  75.9  per  cent  of  the  orchards  now  of  bearing  age 
were  set  between  1855  and  1879. 

The  most  significant  feature  of  this  table,  however,  is  the  one  that 
shows  the  decline  in  plantings.  This  decline  began  about  twenty-five 
years  ago,  and  has  rapidly  continued  till  the  time  of  this  survey.  This 
fact  can  hardly  be  attributed  to  the  San  Jose  scale,  for  this  insect  has  not 
been  prevalent,  or  at  least  not  troublesome  for  much  more  than  six 
years.  This  matter  of  decreased  plantings  should  not  be  looked  upon 
too  lightly  by  the  fruit  grower  of  this  section,  for  the  tendency  is  such 
as  to  cause  alarm,  and  the  final  effect  will  be  serious. 

I.     DIFFERENT  PERIODS  OF  PLANTING 


DATE  OF  PLANTING. 

Number  of 
orchards. 

Number  of 
acres. 

Per  cent 
orchards. 

1820—29  (10  years) 

2 

1830—39  (10  years)  

8 

40 

I     4 

1840—49  (10  years)  

22 

in  r  i 

3  8 

1850—54  (5  years)  

•20 

2  7O 

52 

7  ^ 

688 

12     O 

1860—64     

O2O 

i  86s—  60   . 

47 

467 

8   i 

1870—74  . 

114 

I     136 

19  6 

187  ^—70.  . 

TO  C 

I     098 

18   i 

i  880—84  

36 

6    2 

I  7 

IC7 

2      Q 

I  2 

122 

2     I 

I  80  ^  —  QQ 

8 

78 

I  OOO  —  O4. 

6 

O° 

I    O 

APPLE  ORCHARD  SURVEY  OF  NIAGARA  COUNTY.  289 

Age  and  yield. —  The  period  of  maximum  production  seems  to  come 
between  fifty  and  sixty-five  years  after  planting.  Some  orchards  or 
parts  of  orchards  were  seen,  which  were  planted  previous  to  1830,  but 
no  accurate  data  could  be  given  of  the  yields  so  they  were  not  used 
in  this  computation. 


II.    AGE  AND  YIELD  PER  ACRE  IN  BUSHELS  FOR  ALL  PARTS  OF  THE  COUNTY 

SURVEYED 


DATP    OP 

1902. 

1903. 

1904. 

PLANTING. 

Num- 
ber or- 
chards. 

Num- 
ber 
acres. 

Aver- 
age 
yield. 

Num- 
ber or 
chards. 

Num- 
ber 
acres. 

Aver- 
yifld. 

Num- 
ber or- 
chards. 

Num- 
ber 
acres. 

Aver- 
age 
yield. 

89 

2 

14 

1  1  7 

1840-49  

4 

2 

40 
1  1 

98 

121 

| 

39 
78 

88 
107 

4 
5 

40 
76 

213 
1  73 

26l 

16 

1  06 

1860-64  

3  * 

297 

96 

3  7 

408 

45 

456 

IO2 

1865—69 

356 

48 

458 

69 

162 

187  o—  74  

3° 

267 

136 

43 

3  7  1 

122 

63 

597 

I  70 

l62 

108 

623 

150 

1880-84  

1  1 

105 

198 

15 

153 

71 

23 

123 

I  29 

1885-89  

I  50 

18 

IIS 

I 

4 

160 

AGE  AND  YIELD  PER  ACRE  IN  BUSHELS  FOR  ALL  PARTS  OF  THE  COUNTY  SURVEYED 


DATE  OF  PLANTING. 

1905- 

1906. 

FIVE-YEAR 
AVERAGE. 

Num- 
ber or- 
chards. 

Num- 
ber 
acres. 

Aver- 
age 
yield. 

Num- 
ber or 
chards. 

Num- 
ber 
acres. 

Aver- 
age 
yield. 

Aver- 
age age. 

Aver- 
age 
yield. 

1830—39   

i 
8 
6 

20 

54 
80 

72 

7° 
36 

2 

5 

5 
72 
48 

210 

680 
8l4 
708 
878 
384 
I? 

45 

180 

210 

138 
158 
109 
132 
130 
93 
164 
198 
91 

4 

2 

6 
3i 

5,6 
H 

22 

3 

4 

92 

s> 

90 
216 
640 
768 
330 
618 
300 
15 
36 

60 
240 
75 
208 

202 
159 
98 

144 
123 
71 
72 

*69 
*59 
52 
47 
42 
37 
32 

2? 
22 
17 
12 

in 
170 
123 
168 
124 
135 
131 
I3i 
137 
139 
(0)82 

1855—59      

1860—64 

1865—69 

1880-84  

I88t?-8o 

1890—94  

The  comparatively  high  yield  for  the  last  two  periods,  namely,  1885- 
89  and  1890-94,  is  due  to  the  fact  that  these  orchards  were  mostly 
of  the  Oldenburg  (Dutchess)  variety,  which  is  an  early  bearer. 


*  Average  age  for  a  ten-year  period.     Each  date  of  planting  not  known, 
(a)  Two  year  average. 


290 


BULLETIN  262. 


SOILS 

The  following  data  are  abstracted  from  the  eighth  Report  of  the 
Bureau  of  Soils,  the  survey  which  formed  the  basis  of  the  report  on  the 
Niagara  sheet  having  been  conducted  in  conjunction  with  the  orchard 
survey  in  1906. 

There  are  seventeen  soil  types  in  Niagara  County.  Only  five  of  these, 
however,  have  been  used  extensively  for  apple  orchards,  viz.,  Dunkirk 
loam,  Dunkirk  clay  loam,  Dunkirk  silt  loam,  Clyde  loam  and  Tona- 
wanda  clay. 

THE   SOIL   TYPES 

Dunkirk  loam. —  This  occupies  more  territory  than  any  other  one 
soil,  and  has  been  used  most  largely  for  orchard  plantations.  Consider- 


FIG.  31. — Partial  tillage  with  grass  between  the  rows.     Better  than  no  cultivation, 
but  not  so  good  as  thorough  cultivation 

able  areas  in  Middleport,  Gasport,  North  Wilson,  Newfane,  and  Youngs- 
town  are  of  this  sort.  There  is  also  a  strip  extending  from  Youngstown 
to  Lewiston,  and  then  eastward  along  the  ridge  from  Lewiston  to  'Lock- 
port.  This  type  of  soil  is  derived  from  glacial  material,  and  carries 
some  sandstone  and  shale.  It  is  a  dark  brown  loam,  eight  to  ten 
inches  deep.  The  subsoil  is  a  light  brown,  fine  sandy  loam,  which  is 
compact,  and  becomes  darker  in  color  and  heavier  in  texture  with  depth. 
Stones  are  scattered  through  both  subsoil  and  surface  soil. 

Dunkirk  clay  loam. —  This  ranks  second  in  the  area  occupied.  It  is 
the  most  common  type  about  Niagara  Falls,  Suspension  Bridge,  and 
toward  Sanborn.  This  type  is  a  stiff  and  heavy  clay.  It  is  dark 


APPLE  ORCHARD  SURVEY  OF  NIAGARA  COUNTY. 


291 


brown  to  grayish  brown,  and  runs  to  a  depth  of  eight  inches.  It  is 
generally  free  'of  gravel  and  stones.  The  compact  character  of  this 
soil,  and  the  fact  that  it  is  frequently  found  on  depressed  areas,  renders 
drainage  on  it  very  poor. 

Dunkirk  jilt  loam. —  This  occurs  along  the  lake  from  Youngstown 
eastward  in  interrupted  areas.  It  is  also  common  west  of  Gasport  and 
Orangeport,  and  on  toward  Lockport.  This  type  consists  of  a  pale 
yellow  to  light  brown  silt  loam.  It  is  underlaid  by  a  darker  subsoil. 
It  is  sedimentary  in  origin,  and  represents  the  wash  from  higher  shale 
slopes. 

Clyde  loam. —  This  occurs  in  the  quadrangle  delimited  by  Hickory 
Corners,  Wilson,  Youngstown,  and  Lewiston.  The  largest  single  area 
within  this  district  is  south  and  southwest  of  Wilson.  This  type  is 
derived  from  glacial  lake  deposits.  It  is  somewhat  variable  in  color 
and  appearance.  It  varies  from  a  friable  loam  to  a  dark  gray,  brown 
or  black  color.  The  depth  ranges  from  eight  to  twelve  inches.  It  is 
much  subject  to  puddling  and  when  wet  is  sticky  and  impervious,. 
On  well-drained  areas,  however,  it  is  mellow  and  pervious  to  water. 

Tonawanda  clay. —  This  is  distributed  uniformly  from  southern  Ni- 
agara Falls  to  LaSalle,  on  toward  North  Tonawanda,  and  eastward 
toward  Wheatfield.  Tonawanda  clay  is  much  like  Dunkirk  clay  loam. 
It  is  somewhat  lighter  in  color,  and  is  firmer  in  texture  and  consistency. 
It  has  a  surface  soil  ranging  in  depth  from  five  to  twelve  inches.  It 
carries  very  few  stones,  and  but  little  gravel. 

III.     RELATION  OF  YIELDS  TO  SOIL  TYPES 


1902. 

1903. 

KIND  OF  SOIL. 

Number 
of  or- 
chards. 

Number 
of 
acres. 

Aver- 
age 
yield. 

Number 
of  or- 
chards. 

Number 
of 
acres. 

Aver- 
age 
yield. 

Dunkirk  loam 

68 

167 

161 

Dunkirk  clay  loam  

Dunkirk  silt  loam 

10 

97 

148 

11 

113 

iS7 

Clyde  loam  

•j 

54 

57 

67 

73 

Tonawanda  clay  

16 

108 

Dunkirk  loam   ' 

1904. 
780 

83 

1905- 
826 

160 

Dunkirk  clay  loam  

A 

279 

J57 

301 

*  5  1 

Dunkirk  silt  loam      ... 

Clyde  loam 

8a 

18 

Tonawanda  clay  

Dunkirk  loam 

81 

1906. 

8?? 

Dunkirk  clay   oam  

30 

291 

*35 

Dunkirk  silt  luam 

Clyde  loam  

21 

174 

60 

Tonawanda  clay  

292 


BULLETIN  262. 


Yields  on  different  soil  types. —  Table  III  shows  that  the  Dunkirk 
soils  give  larger  yields  than  the  other  types.  It  shows  also  that  Clyde 
loam  is  considerably  inferior  to  all  others.  It  is  probable  that  the  Clyde 
loam  yields  are  too  low,  but  a  smaller  number  of  orchards  and  acres 
were  used  in  this  computation,  so  the  averages  are  not  so  well  substan- 
tiated. After  all,  the  orchards  on  the  Clyde  loam  were  not  neglected 
ones,  so  the  figures  are  correct  as  far  as  they  go. 

Selection  of  orchards. —  In  order  to  increase  the  value  of  this  study  of 
yields  on  different  soil  types,  the  orchards  were  selected  with  considerable 


FIG.  32. — After  "  thinning,"  by  cutting  out  every  other  row  diagonally  through  the 

orchard 

care.  All  scale-infested  orchards  were  excluded  and  only  those  orchards 
were  considered  which  had  received,  so  far  as  could  be  told,  nearly  equal 
and  uniform  care.  No  neglected  orchards  were  included.  This  sifting 
process  reduces  the  acreage  considerably,  but  seems  to  be  the  only  fair 
method  of  procedure. 

DRAINAGE 

A  study  of  the  accompanying  table  on  drainage  shows  that  a  little 
more  than  half  (52.2  per  cent)  of  the  orchards  have  good  drainage;  about 
one-fourth  (26.3  per  cent)  have  fair  drainage;  10.5  per  cent  have  poor, 
and  1 1. 1  percent  have  locally  bad  drainage.  Furthermore,  it  may  be 
seen  that  there  are  more  orchards  and  more  acres  with  locally  bad 


APPLE  ORCHARD  SURVEY  OF  NIAGARA  COUNTY. 


293 


drainage  than  with  poor  drainage.  Now  if  it  pays  to  have  good  drainage 
on  the  whole  area  of  an  orchard,  it  should  pay  equally  well  to  drain 
any  part  that  needs  it.  It  is  frequently  these  locally  bad  areas  that 
determine  the  profit,  for  such  sections  receive  as  much  care  in  tilling, 
spraying,  and  pruning  but  they  give  little  or  no  return  in  crops. 

Another  feature  shown  by  the  table  is  the  small  proportion  of  orchards 
which  are  given  artificial  drainage ;  and  still  another  is  the  number  of 
acres  of  trees  killed  or  damaged  through  failure  to  provide  good  drain- 
age. It  becomes  clear,  that  little  attention  is  given  to  soil  drainage.* 

IV.     DRAINAGE 


DRAINAGE. 

Number  of 
orchards. 

Number  of 
acres. 

Per  cent 
orchards. 

Character  of  drainage  : 
Good  

•?O2 

2    8^0 

?2    2 

Fair  

1^2 

i   6^1 

26     3 

Poor  

6l 

<^6 

IO      <i 

Locally  bad      

64 

62? 

II       I 

Nature  of  drainage  : 
Natural  

C7Q 

C      A'}  I 

cn  8 

Tile  drained    

20 

3O? 

•3       2 

Stone  drained  

2 

22 

•} 

Surface  ditched  

16 

IOO 

2    6 

Effect  on  the  trees  : 
Trees  killed 

I  3 

jO  7 

Trees  badlv  damaeed.  . 

4. 

T< 

FERTILIZATION 

In  recent  years,  the  orchards  in  the  county  have  been  very  sparingly 
fertilized.  No  figures  were  gathered  regarding  the  use  of  fertilizers 
previous  to  1900,  but  since  that  date  about  eighty  in  every  one  hundred 
orchards  have  been  enriched  in  some  way.  But  this  estimate,  though 
accurate,  is  almost  misleading,  for  any  orchard  that  has  received  any 
fertilizer  whatsoever,  and  even  in  very  small  quantities  and  at  very 
infrequent  intervals,  has  been  classed  as  an  enriched  orchard.  Many 
farmers  do  not  apply  manure  oftener  than  once  in  six  years,  and  rather 
a  large  number  plan  to  cover  orchard  land  once  in  ten  years.  Yet 
variable  as  the  custom  is,  it  has  been  found  that  of  622  orchards  surveyed 
484,  or  77.8  per  cent,  have  received  some  fertilizing  material,  and  138,  or 
22.2  per  cent,  have  never  received  any. 

Barnyard  manure  has  been  used  most  largely;  this  is  followed  by 
green-manuring  with  cover-crops,  while  commercial  fertilizers  rank  third 


*An  instructive  discussion  of  drainage  is  found  in  Bui.  254,  Cornell  University 
Exp.  Station. 


294 


BULLETIN  262. 


in  general  use.  The  need  and  value  of  fertilizers  for  orchards  have 
been  demonstrated  beyond  question  in  Wayne  County,  as  well  as  in 
other  sections  of  the  country,  and  more  attention  might  well  be  given 

to    this    factor    of    orchard 
management. 

Commercial  fertilizers  have 
not  come  into  very  general 
use  in  the  county;  in  fact, 
about  4.3  per  cent  of  the  area 
(acres)  is  enriched  by  com- 
mercial fertilizers  alone  and 
in  combination  with  other 
fertilizers.  A  few  orchard- 
ists  use  commercial  fertilizer 
in  connection  with  manures, 
some  use  ashes  with  manures, 
and  4  per  cent  (of  orchards) 
use  commercial  fertilizers 
alone.  Complete  fertilizers 
are  used  in  only  thirteen  or- 
chards and  on  119  acres.  Fre- 
quently the  phosphorus  is  en- 
tirely omitted. 

Cover-crops  have  also  been 
rather  unpopular.  They  have 
been  used  on  only  about  ten 

per  cent  of  the  orchards.  Buckwheat,  rye  and  clovers  are  the  chief  kinds 
used.  Green-manuring  by  the  use  of  cover-crops  might  well  come  into 
more  general  use,  and  in  this  way  serve  as  a  substitute  for  barnyard 
manure  and  other  fertilizers. 

V.     SUMMARY  OF  FERTILIZERS  USED  ON  BEARING  ORCHARDS 


FIG.  33. — A  poor  type  of  cultivator  for  orchard 
use.  Both  frame  and  handles  "  skin  "  many 
trees 


FERTILIZERS. 

USED  ALONE. 

USED  WITH 
OTHER  FERTILIZERS. 

TOTAL. 

Num- 
ber 
of  or- 
chards. 

Num- 
ber 
of 
acres. 

Per 
cent 
or- 
chards. 

Num- 
ber 
of  or- 
chards. 

Num- 
ber 
of 
acres. 

Per 
cent 
or- 
chards. 

Num- 
ber 
of  or- 
chards. 

Num- 
ber 
of 
acres. 

Per 

cent 
or- 
chards. 

None  

360 
25 
61 

9 
4 

3,702* 
258! 
528 

88* 
34 

78 
5 
13 

2 

•9 

19 

2 

4 

i?5 

10 

30* 

— 

138 
379 
27 
61 

.13 
4 

1,415 
3,877* 
268! 
528 

119 
34 

22 

61 
4 

10 
2 

.6 

Barnyard  manure  
Commercial  fertilizer.  .  . 
Green-manure  (cover)  .  . 
Manure  and  commer- 

Straw  mulch  

APPLE  ORCHARD  SURVEY  OF  NIAGARA  COUNTY.  295 

VI.     KINDS  OF  COMMERCIAL  FERTILIZERS 


FERTILIZERS. 

Number  of 
orchards. 

Number  of 
acres. 

Potash  or  ashes           

8 

77 

Phosphorus  with  potash  or  ashes 

o 

106 

Complete  fertilizer                                                                        •  • 

? 

20* 

THREE-YEAR  AVERAGE  INCOME  PER  ACRE  FOR  ALL  FERTILIZERS 


METHOD  OF  TREATMENT. 

Bushels. 

Income. 

?so  fertilization 

130 

$73 

Barnyard  manure 

*0^ 

1*8 

8* 

Commercial  fertilizers 

^  0" 

148 

82 

Straw  mulch 

I  30 

75 

Cover-crop                          .                            .... 

I  Cl 

78 

The  following  results  were  found  for  Wayne  County  (Bull.  No.  226)  : 

YIELD  IN  BUSHELS  FOR  1902  AND  1903  FOR  FERTILIZED  AND  UNFERTILIZED 
ORCHARDS.     TREES  SET  BEFORE   1880 


TRFATMFNT 

1908. 

1903. 

Two- 
year 

Number 
orchards. 

Acres. 

Average 
yield. 

Number 
orchards. 

Acres. 

Average 
yield. 

average 
yield. 

Fertilized 

2     Il6j 

Unfertilized  

HI 

692 

173 

44 

i  ,  ^i<-»5 
343* 

231 

202 

TILLAGE 

'Acreage  of  tilled  and  unfilled  orchards. —  Precisely  one-third  of  the 
orchards  had  been  tilled  for  a  ten-year  period  previous  to  1906;  and 
fifteen  per  cent  have  been  in  sod  for  this  period.  Seventeen  per  cent, 
or  a  little  less  than  one-fifth,  had  been  tilled  for  five  years,  and  about 
an  equal  number  had  been  in  sod  for  this  period. 


296  BULLETIN  262. 

VII.     TREATMENT  PRIOR  TO   1906.     MATURE  ORCHARDS 


TREATMENT. 

Number  of 
orchards. 

Number  of 
acres. 

Per  cent 
orchards. 

Tilled,  ten  years  or  more 

1  4.2 

I    34.  3 

•7-7      Q 

Tilled  five  years  or  more 

7  I 

27-3 

66-V 
1  6   o 

Tilled  over  half  of  preceding  five  years.  
Sod  over  half  of  preceding  five  years.        .    .  . 

32 

r-? 

423 
64.3 

7.6 
12    7 

Sod.  five  years  or  more            

C7 

^6 
613 

n   6 

Sod.  ten  years  or  more          

64 

627 

IE;     -i 

FIG.  34. — The  work  of  the  "  skinning 
type  of  cultivator 


Methods  of  sod  treatment. —  Sod 
orchards  not  pastured  have  given 
much  better  results  on  the  average 
than  sod  orchards  handled  in  any 
other  way,  but  in  Niagara  County 
there  are  special  reasons  for  this.  In 
the  first  place,  the  unpastured  sod  or- 
chards receive  better  care.  A  sod  or- 
chard that  is  not  pastured  does  not 
mean  a  neglected  orchard.  A  good 
many  growers  who  have  orchard  land 
handled  in  this  manner  make  it  a 
point  to  prune  well,  spray  well,  and 
fertilize  well;  and  although  they  do 
not  cultivate  or  pasture,  yet  they  may 
get  good  crops.  The  much  larger 
number  of  orchards  and  acres  in  sod 
and  not  pastured  is  an  indication  that 
some  of  the  fruit  producers  have 
found  out  these  things  for  themselves. 
Again,  the  unpastured  sod  orchards 
are  generally  younger  than  pastured 
ones. 

On  the  other  hand,  sod  orchards 
which  are  pastured  with  cattle,  sheep, 
or  even  with  hogs,  are  more  likely 
to  be  neglected.  There  are  two  rea- 
sons for  this.  One  is  the  presence  of 
scale,  and  the  other  is  the  tendency 
to  pasture  the  orchards  which  have 
passed  beyond  the  period  of  largest 
crops. 

With  respect  to  the  method  of 
pasturing,  hogs  have  given  better  re- 


APPLE  ORCHARD  SURVEY  OF  NIAGARA  COUNTY. 


297 


suits  than  any  of  the  other  animals.  Sheep  rank  second,  while  cows  or 
horses  give  the  -poorest  results  of  any.  These  latter  results  correspond 
with  those  obtained  in  Orleans  and  Wayne  counties,  and  tend  to  sup- 
port the  rapidly-developing  principle  that  if  one  must  pasture  he  should 
use  hogs  rather  than  any  other  animals. 

VIII.     YIELD  IN  BUSHELS  WITH  VARIOUS  METHODS  OF  SOD  TREATMENT 


1904. 

IQOS. 

1906. 

METHOD 

OF  TREATMENT 

Num- 

Num- 

Aver- 

Num- 

Num- 

Aver- 

Num- 

Num- 

Aver- 

ber or- 

ber 

age 

ber  or- 

ber 

age 

ber  or- 

ber 

age 

chards. 

acres. 

yield. 

chards. 

acres. 

yield. 

chards. 

acres. 

yield. 

Pastured  with  hogs.  .  .  . 

166 

26 

Pastured  with  sheep.  .  .  . 
Pastured  with  cattle.  .  .  . 
Not  pastured  

24 
26 

298 
385 

T      ?82 

i37 
87 

24 
34 

jgC 

321 
428 

113 
7^ 

20 

33 

250 
390 

I     8  I  7 

i39 
90 

Pastured  and  plowed  on 

alternate  years.  .  .  . 

2 

18 

90 

i 

25 

120 

i 

5 

90 

THREE-YEAR  AVERAGE  PER  ACRE: 

Pastured  with  hogs 138.3  bushels 

Pastured  with  sheep 129.6  bushels 

Pastured  with  cattle 83  . 6  bushels 

Not  pastured 142.3  bushels 

A  computation  for  Orleans  County  gave  the  following  results : 

THREE-YEAR  AVERAGE  PER  ACRE:* 

Pastured  with  hogs 312  bushels 

Pastured  with  sheep 308  bushels 

Pastured  with  cattle 153  bushels 

Not  pastured 217  bushels 

Treatment  in  1905  of  mature  orchards. —  In  1905  the  mature  orchards 
were  variously  treated.  A  classification  of  treatment  places  the  methods 
under  ten  different  headings  (see  Table  IX).  By  far  the  largest  number 
of  orchards,  about  44  per  cent,  were  tilled  without  cover-crops.  The 
next  largest  number  or  group,  including  131  orchards  of  1,167  acres, 
which  is  24.5  per  cent,  was  in  sod  with  the  grass  cut  and  left  under  the 
trees.  A  few  orchards  were  given  cover-crops,  and  a  small  number 
were  used  for  hoed  crops. 

The  last  group,  receiving  miscellaneous  treatment,  is  made  up  of  those 
in  which  cultivation  was  given  only  to  parts  of  the  orchard,  or  in  which 
some  pasturing  and  plowing,  but  without  regular  tillage,  was  the  practice. 


*  The  three  years  are  not  the  same  in  both  cases,  which  undoubtedly  accounts 
in  large  measure  for  the  difference  in  yields. 


298 


BULLETIN  262, 


IX.     TREATMENT  IN   1905  OF  MATURE  ORCHARDS 


TREATMENT. 

Number 
orchards. 

Number. 
acres. 

Per  cent 
orchards. 

Tilled,  with  cover-crop 

•2A 

T.T.Q^ 

6.4 

Tilled  without  cover-crop                                  .  . 

23  S 

2,  1  80 

44 

Tilled  with  hoed  crops    .... 

9 

116 

i  .  7 

Sod   sheep  pasture    

26 

270 

4  -9 

Sod,  sheep  and  hog  pasture  

4 

39 

.8 

Sod   hog  pasture 

^2 

308 

6  o 

Sod   cattle  pasture 

-2  I 

^wo 
T.T.Q* 

5-8 

Sod   grass  cut  and  left                                      .    . 

IT.I 

I,l67 

24  .   Z 

Sod   not  included  in  above          .  .    .  .           .... 

•?2 

268 

6.0 

Miscellaneous  .  .  .  . 

28 

44qA 

(a) 

Total  tilled  

278 

2  ,  644^ 

49 

Total  Sod  

256 

2  .400^ 

47-7 

(a)  Not  included  in  percentage  determinations. 

X.     TREATMENT  IN   1905  OF  YOUNG  TREES.     (SET  SINCE   1895) 


TREATMENT. 

Number 
orchards. 

Number 
acres. 

Per  cent 
orchards. 

Tilled   planted  to  a  cultivated  crop  

8 

98 

72    7 

Tilled,  sowed  to  grain  crop  

2 

1  1 

18  2 

Sod,  hav  cut  

I 

6 

0    I 

Soil  methods  with  young  orchards  in  1905. —  Most  of  the  young 
orchards  in  1905  were  given  proper  soil  treatment;  72.7  per  cent  were 
planted  with  hoed  or  cultivated  crops,  18.2  per  cent  were  sown  to  grain 
and  only  9.1  per  cent  were  left  in  sod  and  handled  as  a  hay  field. 

Average  returns  in  relation  to  soil  treatment. —  A  careful  study  of 
yields  and  prices  was  made  to  determine  what  relation  exists  between  soil 
treatment  and  profits.  The  product  of  these  computations  in  terms  of 
averages  is  given  in  the  accompanying  table.  These  tabulations  cover 
a  period  of  ten  years  or  more,  and  extend  over  the  entire  county,  and 
therefore  furnish  a  fairly  accurate  index  to  the  economic  status  of  this 
factor  of  orchard  management.  If  the  reader  consults  a  table  of  these 
averages  for  any  individual  year,  he  may  find  some  inexplicable  figures ; 
but  these  should  be  viewed  as  arising  out  of  peculiar  environmental 
conditions.  However,  we  are  concerned  more  with  the  general  rule, 
and  thus  find  the  most  reliable  information  comes  from  a  study  of 
the  five-year  averages. 

The  table  of  five-year  averages  shows  that  a  long-term  tillage,  say 
ten  or  more  years,  gives  not  only  the  largest  yield,  but  also  the  largest 
income.  A  long-term  tillage  is  far  superior  to  a  long  term  of  sod  treat- 
ment, This  table  shows  also  that  a  five-  or  even  three-year  tillage 


APPLE  ORCHARD  SURVEY  OF  NIAGARA  COUNTY. 


299 


is  much  better  than  the  same  period  with  sod  treatment.  The  conclu- 
sion of  the  whole  matter  is  this :  certain  sod  orchards  under  special 
conditions,  such  as  heavy  manure  mulching,  together  with  some  pastur- 
ing to  keep  the  grass  down,  give  good  results, —  perhaps  as  good  as 
clean  cultivation.  But  the  skillful  fruit  grower  can  expect  more  than 
the  law  of  averages  will  give.  And  even  the  general  grower  should  note 
that  thorough  tillage  is  the  most  profitable  method  of  soil  management. 


XI.     AVERAGE  YIELD  IN  BUSHELS  AND  AVERAGE  INCOME  PER  ACRE  OF  SOD  AND 

TILLED  ORCHARDS 


METHOD   OF  TREATMENT. 


1907. 


Number 
orchards. 


Number 
acres. 


Average 
yield. 


Average 
income. 


Tilled  ten  years  or  more 

Tilled  five  years  or  more 

Tilled  at  least  three  years 

Sod  at  least  three  years 

Sod  five  years  or  more 

Sod  ten  years  or  more 

Tilled  ten  years  or  more 

Tilled  five  years  or  more 

Tilled  at  least  three  years 

Sod  at  least  three  years 

Sod  five  years  or  more 

Sod  ten  years  or  more 

Tilled  ten  years  or  more 

Tilled  five  years  or  more 

Tilled  at  least  three  years 

Sod  at  least  three  years 

Sod  five  years  or  more 

Sod  ten  years  or  more 

Tilled  ten  years  or  more 

Tilled  five  years  or  more 

Tilled  at  least  three  years 

Sod  at  least  three  years 

Sod  five  years  or  more 

Sod  ten  years  or  more 

Tilled  ten  years  or  more 

Tilled  five  years  or  more 

Tilled  at  least  three  years 

Sod  at  least  three  years 

Sod  five  years  or  more 

Sod  ten  years  or  more 


57 

22 

10 

8 

4 

14 


IOO 

40 
27 

18 
18 


117 

55 
44 
53 

20 
38 


28 
2O 

18 
48 
35 
13 


34 

22 
16 

38 

37 
29 


645 

185 

88 

93 

44 

144 


i  ,040 
405 
368 

353 

2Q2 
28l 


1904. 


1,203 

573 
239 
767 
566 
338 


406 
179 
182 

577 
450 
146 


1906. 


342 

3°9 
240 

434 
338 
332 


186 
*39 
165 
157 
145 
181 


408 
326 
214 
278 
280 
264 


282 
224 
230 

174 
171 

160 


258 
312 
300 
271 
218 
192 


261 
270 
285 
165 
170 

165 


$134 

88 

104 

58 

83 


$148 
117 
141 
82 
127 
103 


$126 

125 

I3I 

87 

83 

84 


$71 
9i 
49 
53 
37 
35 


$121 
80 
60 

57 
5i 
48 


300 


BULLETIN  262. 
FITE-YEAR  AVERAGE  PER  ACRE 


METHOD  OF  TREATMENT. 

Bushels. 

Income. 

Tilled  ten  years  or  more  

27Q 

$120 

Tilled  five  years  or  more  

2  $4. 

IOO 

Tilled  at  least  three  years. 

2  7Q 

0*7 

Sod  at  least  three  years    .  . 

2OQ 

67 

Sod  five  years  or  more    .  . 

107 

76 

Sod  ten  vears  or  more  .    .                              . 

IQ2 

7  ^ 

The  results  for  Orleans  County  (Bull.  No.  229)  furnish  an  interesting 
comparison  (four  of  the  calendar  years  are  the  same  in  the  two  cases)  : 

AVERAGE  YIELD  IN  BUSHELS  AND  INCOME  PER  ACRE  OF  TILLED  AND  SOD 

ORCHARDS.     ALL  ORCHARDS 
FIVE-YEAR  AVERAGE  PER  ACRE 


METHOD  OF  TREATMENT. 

Bushels. 

Income. 

Tilled  ten  years  or  more  

327 

$182 

Tilled  five  years  or  more  

274 

138 

Tilled  over  half  of  preceding  five  years 

22? 

Hi 

Sod  over  half  of  preceding  five  years 

222 

IO7 

Sod  five  years  or  more             ... 

2O4. 

AW  f 

108 

Sod  ten  years  or  more  

176 

87 

AVERAGE  YIELD  IN  BUSHELS  AND  INCOME  PER  ACRE  OF  TILLED  AND  SOD 

ORCHARDS.     ORCHARDS  ALL  WELL  CARED  FOR 

FIVE-YEAR  AVERAGE  PER  ACRE 


METHOD  OF  TREATMENT. 

Bushels. 

Income 

Tilled  ten  years  or  more  

•3?7 

$180 

206 

148 

Tilled  over  half  of  preceding  five  years 

234. 

121 

Sod  over  half  of  preceding  five  years 

24.2 

118 

Sod  five  years  or  more    

2<;8 

134 

Sod  ten  years  or  more  

2  32 

117 

ENEMIES  OF  THE  APPLE 

The  codling  moth  and  the  San  Jose  scale  have  been  and  are  still 
the  worst  enemies  of  the  apple  in  Niagara  County.  The  codling  moth 
is  an  ever-present  pest  in  every  orchard  of  much  size  in  the  county, 


APPLE  ORCHARD  SURVEY  OF  NIAGARA  COUNTY. 


301 


but   its    ravages    have   been    much   reduced    and    fairly   well   controlled 
where  careful  sprayings  have  been  given. 

The  San  Jose  scale,  although  not  so  widely  spread  as  the  codling  moth 
or  some  other  insects,  has  been  far  more  destructive  than  all  other 
pests  combined.  In  fact,  the  loss  of  fruit  and  the  destruction  of  trees 
have  been  so  great  as  to  threaten  the  eradication  of  the  whole  apple 
industry  in  the  western  part  of  the  county.  This  alarming  outlook 
is  due  more  to  a  combination  of.  unfavorable  conditions  than  to  the 
character  of  the  scale  or  the  inefficiency  of  spray  mixtures.  For  the 


FIG.  35. — A  good  equipment  for  making  lime  and  sulfur.      The  engine  pumps  water 
from  a  pool  at  left,  and  the  boiler  furnishes  steam  for  cooking  the  mixture 

past  three  years,  the  special  difficulties  have  been  of  three  kinds,  and 
these  are  associated  with  climate,  the  management  of  the  trees,  and 
the  attitude  of  the  fruit  growers.  Each  of  these  may  be  briefly  treated. 

Many  growers  have  been  bothered  to  find  suitable  weather  for  spray- 
ing. In  spring,  when  most  of  the  spraying  for  scale  has  been  done, 
there  were  frequent  rains,  strong  winds,  or  wind  in  the  wrong  direction ; 
or  in  some  instances,  a  combination  of  all  three.  In  consequence  of 
these  obstacles  a  few  orchards  were  not  sprayed  at  all,  while  some  others 
were  only  partially  sprayed,  and  in  still  other  cases  an  ineffective  spray- 
ing was  all  that  could  be  accomplished. 

In  the  second  category  of  difficulties  comes  an  improper  manage- 
ment of  the  trees.  By  this  is  meant  a  failure  to  keep  the  trees  within 


3O2  BULLETIN  262. 

manageable  limits.  A  great  many  of  the  orchards  contain  trees  that 
are  too  large  and  high  to  make  spraying  feasible.  In  other  cases  the 
tops  are  too  bushy  and  full  of  branches.  Effective  spraying  can  never 
be  done  unless  thorough  pruning  is  annually  practiced.  Beyond  a 
doubt,  insufficient  pruning  has  been  a  leading  cause  of  failures. 

The  final,  and  perhaps  most  important  difficulty,  is  the  attitude 
of  the  fruit  growers  themselves.  Because  some  have  failed  in  their 
fight  against  the  scale,  many  believe  it  is  useless  to  try.  The  chief 
difficulty,  which  is  really  fundamental,  lies  in  the  fact  that  a  majority 
of  the  orchardists  failed  to  recognize  the  scale  when  it  entered  their 
orchards,  or  neglected  to  fight  it  till  the  insect  became  well  established. 


FIG.  36. — Excessive  pruning  of  scale -infested  trees.      Note  renewal  of  tops  now  free 
of  scale.     In  orchard  of  Willard  Hopkins,  Youngstown 

Just  how  the  scale  made  its  advent  into  the  county  is  not  known. 
Some  assert  that  it  was  brought  by  birds  from  Canadian  orchards,  and 
others  affirm  that  it  was  introduced  on  nursery  stock  shipped  in  from 
the  South  Atlantic  states.  Mr.  T.  Greiner,  of  La  Salle,  says  that  he 
had  scale  as  early  as  1899;  and  in  Youngstown  and  Lewiston  the  insect 
has  been  familiar  for  at  least  six  years.  In  their  efforts  to  control  the 
pest,  some  of  the  more  progressive  orchardists  have  tried  all  the  recom- 
mended insecticides  and*  caustics,  such  as  lime  and  sulphur,  crude  oil, 
Scalecide,  and  kerosene  emulsion.  A  few  of  the  growers  have  given 
more  attention  to  pruning  than  to  spraying.  A  thinning-out  of  the 
tree  top,  and  a  reduction  of  the  shoot  system,  followed  by  careful  spray- 
ing, has  proved  the  best  method  of  control.  Excessive  pruning,  amount- 
ing to  a  removal  of  nearly  the  entire  tree  top  and  leaving  only  a  few 
main  branches  three  to  four  feet  in  length,  has  been  tried  in  Willard 
Hopkins'  orchard.  See  Fig.  36. 


APPLE  ORCHARD  SURVEY  OF  NIAGARA  COUNTY.  303 

A  few  other  interesting  observations  were  made  in  this  connection 
during  the  summer  of  1907,  and  may  be  recorded  here  as  worthy  of  some 
attention : 

Some  varieties  suffer  more  than  others  from  the  scale.  Greenings 
and  Baldwins  appear  to  be  most  subject  to  scale,  while  Russets,  Tolman, 
Oldenburg  (Duchess),  and  Ben  Davis  suffer  much  less.  This  may  be 
due  to  a  difference  in  the  character  of  the  bark. 

Trees  in  the  central  part  of  an  orchard  suffer  more  than  those  near 
the  outside,  due  perhaps  to  the  better  winter  protection  to  the  scale. 
Trees  in  the  centre  of  an  orchard  are  a  little  less  exposed  to  cold  and 
drying  winds  and  other  adversities  of  the  winter  season. 

Trees  in  a  tilled  orchard  are  injured  more  than  those  in  a  sod  orchard; 
the  more  rapid  growth  and  softer  tissue  in  the  tilled  orchard  may  be 
advantageous  to  the  scale. 

Early-maturing  varieties  usually  carry  a  smaller  number  of  scales  on 
the  fruit. 

Scale  is  always  much  worse  where  the  pruning  is  insufficient. 

Low  heads  and  open  top  retard  the  spread  of  the  scale  on  individual 
trees.* 

The  apple  scab,  which  has  been  so  troublesome -in  apple  districts 
generally,  and  especially  in  Wayne  and  Orleans  counties,  has  not 
been  serious  the  last  few  years  in  Niagara  County.  The  scarcity  of 
this  fungus,  and  the  consequent  small  loss  from  it,  are  probably  due 
to  the  exceedingly  dry  weather  in  the  summers  of  1906  and  1907. 

The  collar  rot,  observed  in  many  orchards  in  Wayne  and  Orleans  coun- 
ties, is  not  of  infrequent  occurrence  in  Niagara.  Observations  of  the 
distribution  of  this  disease  tend  to  confirm  earlier  studies,  namely, 
that  it  is  confined  largely  to  poorly  drained  land.  It  is  important, 
however,  to  note  that  the  rot  in  Niagara  County  is  more  frequent  on 
Baldwins  and  Greenings  than  was  formerly  supposed.  And  this  suggests 
that  this  disease  is  oftener  associated  with  poorly  drained  soil  than  with 
particular  varieties  of  apples. 


*  The  San  Jose*  scale  has  long  been  studied  at  the  New  York  Agricultural  Ex- 
periment Station  at  Geneva,  and  those  interested  should  address  that  Station  for 
bulletins  on  this  subject. 


304  BULLETIN  262. 

XII.     PRINCIPAL  ENEMIES  OF  THE  APPLE  IN  1905,   1906  AND  1907 


NUMBER  ORCHARDS. 

NUMBER  ACRES. 

Slight. 

Con- 
sider- 
able. 

Se- 
rious. 

Slight. 

Con- 
sider- 
able. 

Se- 
rious. 

San  Jose"  Scale  (Aspidiotus  perniciosus)  

34 
82 
207 
40 
13 
19 

I? 
17 
53 

12 
42 

61 

10 

27 
266 
104 
28 
20 
23 

44 
38 
55 
14 
61 
63 
9 

59 

72 
20 

12 

7 

20 
19 

3 

4 
4 
37 
4 

485 
936 
1,317 
529* 
173 
182 

249^ 
181 
526 
136 
475 
553 
116 

289 
2,086 
919 
287i 
i  So 
258 

549 
356 
528 
I5i 
643 
6i5 
86 

628 
648 
165* 

99? 

10 

194 
243i 

39 
34 
19 
350 

54 

Apple  scab  on  leaves  (Venturia  inaequalis)  .... 
Apple  scab  on  fruit  (Venturia  inaequalis)  

Cigar  case  bearer  (Coleophora  fletcherella]  
Oyster    shell     bark    louse     (Mytilaspis    porno- 

Fall  web  worm  (  Hyphantria  cunea)  

Cankerworm  (  Paleacrita  vernata)  

Collar  rot                                                            .    ... 

An  additional  list  of  enemies  of  lesser  importance,  and  not  especially 
troublesome  except  in  unsprayed  orchards,  is  here  appended:  woolly 
aphis,  tent  caterpillar,  red  spider,  leaf  roller,  leaf  miner,  plum  scale 
(Lecanium  sp.),  .bud  moth,  leaf  hopper,  curculio,  borer,  cottony  scale, 
blister  mite. 

SPRAYING 

Methods  of  spraying. — About  four-fifths  of  the  orchards  are  generally 
sprayed.  Nineteen  per  cent  were  seldom  or  never  sprayed,  while  6.8^ 
which  were  annually  sprayed  in  the  past  were  not  sprayed  in  1905. 
Approximately  the  same  percentages  hold  with  respect  to  acres.  If  one 
were  to  exclude  the  scale-infested  area,  a  different  showing  would  be 
made;  for  of  those  who  do  spray,  more  applications  of  some  kind  are 
given  since  an  extra  one  is  added  for  scale.  But  on  the  otherv  hand,  a 
number  of  otherwise  good  orchards  are  given  up  to  the  scale. 

The  records  show  that  ten  different  kinds  or  combinations  of  spray 
mixtures  have  been  used.  Experimental  solutions  for  the  scale  have 
increased  this  number  by  one-half.  Several  of  these  have  been  tried, 
however,  in  only  a  few  orchards.  Paris  green  and  Bordeaux  mixture 
ranks  first,  and  second  to  this  are  prepared  mixtures.  Paris  green 
has  seldom  been  used  alone. 


APPLE  ORCHARD  SURVEY  OF  NIAGARA  COUNTY. 


305 


XIII.     SPRAYING  IN   1905 


HOW  SPRAYED. 

Number 
orchards. 

Number 
acres. 

Per  cent 
orchards. 

Seldom  or  never  sprayed  

98 

864 

19  .  I 

Usually  sprayed,  but  not  in  1905  
Sprayed  once 

35 
104 

409 
I    105 

6.8 

2O     T. 

Sprayed  twice 

203 

2     1^6 

30  6 

Sprayed  three  times 

68 

67=5 

IT.     •? 

Sprayed  four  times                         .        .        ... 

4 

40 

0.8 

Sprayed  five  times  .           .             

i 

7 

O  .  2 

Total  unsprayed    .         

i^3 

1,273 

2  E;  .  9 

Total  sprayed.  .  .          •  

380 

2      QQ2 

•         74  .  i 

XIV.     KINDS  OF  SPRAYS  USED  IN   1905 


TREATMENT. 

Number 
orchards. 

Number 
acres. 

Per  cent 
orchards. 

Paris  green  and  Bordeaux  mixture  

221 

2  .  2  30 

<7  .  3 

Arsenic  and  Bordeaux  mixture  

7 

2  3 

0.8 

Bordeaux  mixture  only 

16 

166 

41 

Prepared  mixtures 

IO  I 

074 

26     2 

Bordeaux  mixture  and  lime  and  sulfur  
Lime  and  sulfur  alone 

19 

IO 

197 
00 

4-9 

2     6 

Scalecide                                                .                 .    . 

2 

10 

O     <J 

Crude  oil                      .    .             ... 

IO 

2OO 

2     6 

Kerosene  emulsion             ...             .    .        .    . 

2 

16 

O     <? 

Paris  green  onlv                 .    .        .             •        •    . 

2 

IO 

o    <; 

How  spraying  affects  yields  and  incomes. —  The  best  answer  to  this 
question  may  be  obtained  by  referring  to  the  tables  on  this  subject. 
Two  computations  were  made  on  this  point,  one  including  all  orchards 
within  the  survey  and  the  other  only  well-cared-for  orchards.  The 
first  table  shows  that  the  greatest  yield  follows  from  three  sprayings, 
although  there  was  a  small  gain  in  average  income  in  favor  of  four 
sprayings.  It  is  interesting  as  well  as  instructive  to  note  the  rising 
scale  of  average  incomes  in  passing  from  the  unsprayed  group  to  that 
of  four  sprayings.  This  scale  holds  good  for  both  tables. 

XV.     SPRAYING  AND  YIELD  AND  INCOME  PER  ACRE,  1905.     ALL  ORCHARDS 

INCLUDED 


HOW  SPRAYED. 

Number 
orchards. 

Number 
acres. 

Average 
yield. 

Average 
income. 

Unsprayed   

99 

I  ,  071 

261 

$45 

Sprayed  once  

74 

777 

364 

93 

Sprayed  twice 

162 

I    778 

^OQ 

IOI 

Sprayed  three  times 

6^ 

526 

C77 

171 

Sprayed  four  times  .  . 

C 

76 

300 

183 

306 


BULLETIN  262. 


XVI.     SPRAYING   AND   YIELD   AND   INCOME   PER  ACRE,    1905.     ORCHARDS  ALL 

WELL  CARED  FOR 


HOW  SPRAYED. 

Number 
orchards. 

Number 
acres. 

Average 
yield. 

Number 
orchards.* 

Number 
acres.* 

Average 
income. 

Unsprayed  

57 

720 

266 

61 

8to 

«QP 

Sprayed  once             .                  .... 

368 

A.8 

j88 

1/16 

Si 

82 

<,  eg 

Sprayed  three  times  
Sprayed  four  times 

40 

425 

440 
2gc 

40 

425 

201 

*  The  computations  for  average  income  were  based  on  a  larger  number  of  orchards    than  were 
those  for  average  yield,  hence  the  repetition  of  these  headings. 

It  is  interesting  in  this  connection  to  note  the  results  as  computed  for 
Orleans  County  (Bull.  No.  229),  hence  tables  and  comments  are  printed 
herewith : 

"Relation  of  spraying  to  yields  and  prices. —  The  first  table  below 
shows  that  the  sprayed  orchards  give  a  much  higher  yield  and  income 
per  acre  than  the  unsprayed.  The  difference  in  income  is  due  to  the 
larger  yield,  larger  percentage  of  the  crop  barreled  and  higher  price  per 
barrel.  It  will  be  seen  that  those  sprayed  three  times  gave  31  per  cent 
larger  yield  and  51  per  cent  larger  income  than  those  not  sprayed. 

SPRAYING  AND  YIELD  AND  INCOME  PER  ACRE,  ORLEANS  Co.,   1904 


YIELDS. 

Per 
cent 

INCOMES 

HOW  SPRAYED. 

Number 
orchards. 

Number 
acres. 

Average 
yield. 

of  crop 
bar- 
reled. 

Number 
orchards. 

Number 
acres. 

Average 
income. 

Unsprayed    

IOO 

91  ?i 

245 

71 

94 

86iJ 

$92 

5O4 

307 

7  1 

46 

468 

116 

Sprayed  twice  
Sprayed  three  times  
Sprayed  four  times  

90 
40 
6 

92If 

426 
43 

343 
322 

569 

B 

77 

84 
37 
6 

864* 
406 
43 

1^7 
139 

211 

SPRAYING  AND  YIELD  AND  INCOME  PER  ACRE,  ORLEANS  Co.,  1904.     ORCHARDS 

ALL  WELL  CARED  FOR 


HOW  SPRAYED. 

YIELDS. 

Per 
cent 
of  crop 
bar- 
reled. 

INCOMES. 

Number 
orchards. 

Number 
acres. 

Average 
yield. 

Numbei 
orchards. 

Number 
acres. 

Average 
income. 

43 
33 
70 
27 
6 

38t 
352 
701 
2<»75 
43 

328 
346 
374 
414 
569 

66 
74 
78 
87 
77 

54 
30 
64 
*3 

6 

449i 
316 
6*4 
236* 
43 

$103 
139 
143 
184 

2il 

Sprayed  once.  .           

Sprayed  twice  

Sprayed  three  times  

Sprayed  four  times  

APPLE  ORCHARD  SURVEY  OF  NIAGARA  COUNTY. 


307 


"A  part  of  the  difference  in  yield  and  income  is  due  to  other  factors. 
The  unsprayed  orchards  are  likely  to  be  somewhat  neglected  in  other 
respects.  To  eliminate  this  factor,  another  classification  was  made  after 
all  neglected  orchards  were  thrown  out. 

"  The  second  table  includes  only  those  orchards  that  are  fairly  well 
cared  for.  They  are  not  badly  diseased  or  damaged  from  any  cause. 
This  shows  a  marked  difference  in  the  percentage  of  the  crop  barreled 
and  in  average  yield  and  income,  the  average  income  per  acre  being: 
unsprayed,  $103;  sprayed  once,  $139;  sprayed  twice,  $143;  sprayed 
three  times,  $184.  Allowing  for  the  cost  of  the  extra  barrels  required, 
for  the  cost  of  spraying  and  for  a 'possible  difference  due  to  other  causes 
than  spraying,  there  is  certainly  enough  difference  left  to  give  a  large 
profit  from  the  practice." 

Spraying  for  the  scab. —  Spraying  influences  in  a  very  material  way  the 
character  of  the  crop  and  the  amount  of  income.  As  the  writer  has  pre- 
viously noted,  the  summers  of  1906  and  1907  were  so  dry  that  very  little 
scab  developed,  and  for  this  reason  no  computation  in  Niagara  County 
was  made  to  show  the  relation  of  scab  to  income.  In  view  of  this  fact 
it  seems  well  to  publish  the  table  formulated  for  Orleans  County.  It 
will  be  seen  from  this  table  that  the  greatest  income  comes  where  there 
is  little  scab.  For  example,  associate  0—5  per  cent  scab  with  an 
average  income  per  acre  of  $143,  and  contrast  this  with  76-100  per 
cent  scab  with  an  average  income  per  acre  of 


XVII.     RELATION  OF  SCAB  TO  INCOME  AND  YIELDS,  ORLEANS  Co.,   1904 


PER  CENT  OF  SCAB. 

Average  yield 
per  acre  — 
bushels. 

Average 
income  per 
acre. 

Per  cent 
of  the  crop 
barreled. 

O—          S.  . 

182 

$143 

81 

6-  2  <;  

•3  IQ 

IO2 

7er 

26—  «:o.. 

32  ? 

IOZ 

72 

ci—  ycr.  .                             

284 

8? 

68 

248 

88 

7o 

To  control  the  scab,  spray  with  Bordeaux  mixture  3-3-50  at  the  periods 
indicated  on  page  309  for  codling  moth. 

Spraying  for  scale. —  Spraying  for  San  Jose  scale  has  not  been  very 
generally  practiced,  and  because  of  this  fact  the  insect  is  gaining  ground 
every  year.  The  infested  area  extends  from  La  Salle  to  Niagara  Falls, 
through  Lewiston  and  Youngstown  to  Wilson,  and  includes  a  few 
orchards  in  Olcott  and*  Lockport.  In  this  area  over  seventy-five  per 


3o8 


BULLETIN  262. 


cent  of  the  orchards  are  more  or  less  infested.  The  records  show  that 
within  these  bounds  only  forty-three  orchards  have  been  sprayed  with 
solutions  to  kill  the  scale.  Lime  and  sulfur  has  been  used  more  than 
any  other  spray,  although  Scalecide  and  crude  oil  have  been  tried  with 
some  degree  of  success  in  about  one-third  of  the  orchards.  Observa- 
tions, however,  tend  to  show  that  lime  and  sulfur  should  be  adopted 


pIG.  ^y. —  Lime  and  sulfur,  an  effective  spray  for  San  Jose  scale.     Left  side  of  tree 
sprayed,  right  side  uns prayed.     In  orchard  of  Erinon  Shippey,   Youngstown 

as  the  standard  spray  for  scale.     The  formula  for  lime  and  sulfur  now 
recommended  for  use  is : 

Lime 20  pounds 

Sulfur  (flour  or  flowers) 15  pounds 

Water 5°  gallons 

The  preparation  of  this  mixture  involves  careful  attention  to  several 
particulars.  The  essentials  briefly  stated  are  as  follows:  Take  the 
total  quantity  of  sulfur  to  be  used  and  make  a  thick  paste  with  water. 
Heat  in  a  cooking  receptacle  about  one-third  of  the  quantity  of  water 
required.  When  this  water  is  hot,  add  all  the  lime  and  -all  the  sulfur 


APPLE  ORCHARD  SURVEY  OF  NIAGARA  COUNTY.  309 

paste.  Stir  the  solution  while  it  is  cooking.  When  the  lime  has  slaked, 
add  another  third  of  hot  water.  Boil  for  fifty  minutes,  then  strain 
the  wash  into  the  spray  tank,  and  finally  add  the  last  third  of  waiter. 
The  last  addition  of  water  may  be  hot  or  cold,  preferably  hot. 

The  kind  of  apparatus  employed  in  cooking  is  immaterial,  but  it 
should  be  suitable,  convenient  and  economical.  The  time  of  application 
of  this  spray  is  important.  Lime  and  sulfur  washes  may  be  applied  in 
the  fall  as  soon  as  the  trees  have  become  dormant,  and  after  the  leaves 
have  fallen.  Experiments  in  different  parts  of  the  country  indicate, 
however,  that  the  best  results  follow  application  in  spring  just  before  the 
growth  of  the  tree  begins.  It  is  a  fungicide  as  well  as  an  insect-killer. 
More  recent  experience  has  demonstrated  that  lime-sulfur  in  self-boiled 
form  and  in  the  manufactured  proprietory  mixture  may  be  used  satis- 
factorily as  a  summer  spray  when  properly  diluted.  In  the  case  of  ,the 
concentrated  manufactured  mixture  it  should  test  32  degrees  by  the 
Beaume  hydrometer  and  then  be  diluted  by  adding  30  parts  of  water  to 
I  part  of  concentrate. 

Controlling  codling  moth. — A  study  of  Table  XI  shows  that  the  cod- 
ling moth  was  found  to  be  causing  slight  injury  in  82  orchards  com- 
prising 936  acres,  considerable  injury  in  266  orchards  covering  2,086 
acres,  and  serious  injury  in  72  orchards  embracing  648  acres.  This 
means  that  this  insect  is  far  too  numerous  and  injurious  for  successful 
fruit-growing.  The  approved  methods  of  controlling  the  codling  moth 
may  be  classed  under  five  headings. 

i.  Spraying.  Observations  throughout  the  county  tend  to  show  that 
more  attention  must  be  given  to  the  time  and  manner  of  spraying. 
Two  sprayings  when  properly  done  are  sufficient  for  the  codling  moth. 

(a)  Immediately  after  the  blossoms  fall. 

(b)  Eight  to  twelve  days  after  the  second  spraying. 

The  first  application  is  very  important.  If  the  insecticide  is  thoroughly 
driven  into  the  calyx  cup  at  this  time  greater  destruction  of  the  larvae 
is  insured. 

Some  fruit  growers  have  followed  these  directions  explicitly,  and 
yet  suffer  from  this  pest.  This  leads  naturally  to  the  second  feature 
of  spraying,  namely,  the  manner  of  application.  It  is  a  well-established 
fact  that  nearly  three-fourths  of  the  codling  worms  enter  the  apple 
through  the  calyx.  It  is  therefore  of  utmost  importance  that  the  calyx 
cavity  be  well  filled  with  poison  so  that  the  first  meal  of  the  young 
worm  shall  be  his  last.  In  order  to  fill  the  calyx  cavity,  the  spray  should 
be  applied  from  four  sides  of  each  tree.  This  may  be  done  by  placing  the 
spray  wagon  in.  the  open  space  between  four  trees  and  turning  the  hose 


3io 


BULLETIN  262. 


toward  each  of  the  four  trees.  This  will  insure  the  thorough  spraying  of 
every  branch  from  the  proper  direction.  Use  a  nozzle  which  delivers  a 
rather  coarse  spray  of  great  penetration,  and  attach  it  to  the  extension  rod 
with  a  brass  elbow.  Maintain  a  pressure  of  125  to  150  Ibs.  if  possible. 
2.  Some  birds  are  useful  in  combating  codling  moth.  Woodpeckers 
and  nuthatches  are  specially  helpful,  and  their  presence  should  be 
encouraged.  In  winter  these  birds  pick  the  larvae,  which  is  the  winter 
form  of  codling  moth,  from  the  bark  of  trees,  and  thus  destroy  many 

of  these  insects. 

3.  Thorough   scraping  of  the 
bark  of  trees  will  expose  many 
wintering    larvae,    and    aid    in 
their  control. 

4.  Gather     and     destroy     all 
windfalls    and    wormy    fruit. 
Sheep  or  hogs  can  do  much  of 
this  work. 

5.  Use    burlap   bands   on   the 
tree    trunks.       Kill    all    insects 
under  them  every  ten  days  from 
July  1st  to  August  ist,  and  once 
again  later  before  winter. 

PRUNING 

The  following  table  shows  the 
facts  with  respect  to  pruning. 
In  66.7$  of  the  orchards  com- 
pared as  to  character  of  work, 
the  pruning  is  good  or  fair,  in 
25.3$  it  is  poor  or  carelessly 
done,  and  in  8$  no  pruning  is 
done. 

With  respect  to  the  frequency 
of  pruning,  it  may  be  seen  that 
over  one-half,  or  54.6$  of  the  orchards  compared  as  to  this  factor,  are 
pruned  every  year ;  22.6^  are  pruned  on  alternate  years,  7.7^  are  pruned 
every  third  year,  and  15.1$  are  not  pruned  at  any  regular  interval. 

A  third  classification  of  results  shows  that  in  65.9$  of  the  orchards 
thus  compared,  the  tops  are  left  too  dense;  in  34.2$  the  tops  are  too 
high. 


FIG.  38. — Trees  banded  with  burlap  to  catch 
the  codling  moth  as  it  climbs  the  trunk 
in  late  summer  to  form  cocoons  for  winter 


APPLE  ORCHARD  SURVEY  OF  NIAGARA  COUNTY. 


Some  of  the  essential  points  in  pruning  were  given  in  Bulletin  226. 
The  first  four  here  given  are  transcribed  from  that  publication. 

1.  The  branches  should  be  cut  close  to  the  main  limb. 

2.  Large  limbs  should  not  be  removed  unless  necessary. 

3.  Paint  should  be  used  on  all  large  wounds,  and  renewed  yearly  until 
the  wounds  are  healed. 

4.  Pruning  should  be  done  every  year  rather  than  give  an  occasional 
thorough  trimming. 

5.  Thinning  out  the  tops  should  be  practiced  regularly. 

6.  Do  not  continually  prune  off  the  lowest  branches. 

XVIII.     DATA  ON  PRUNING 


CHARACTER  OF  WORK. 

Number 
orchards; 

Number 
acres. 

Per  cent 
orchards. 

Character  of  work  : 
Good  

156 

I  ,  C7Q 

3O.6 

Fair   

184 

1.772 

°  _, 
36.  I 

Poor  or  neglected  

I2Q 

I  ,  2OQ 

25  .3 

None        

41 

483 

8.0 

Frequency  of  pruning: 
Every  year  

2^6 

2,766 

54.6 

Every  other  year  

106 

I  ,  230 

22.6 

Everv  third,  year                    .                     ... 

^6 

?86 

7  .  7 

Infrequently                        ...        .        

71 

8715 

I  Z   .    I 

Other  features  of  pruning  : 
Tops  too  dense  .  .               

cr4 

468 

6"?.o 

Tops  too  hi^h                    

28 

270 

34.2 

NUMBER  OF  TREES  PER  ACRE 

There  has  been  great  variation  in  the  number  of  trees  planted  to 
the  acre.  A  few  orchardists  have  planted  as  close  as  22  x  22  feet,  some 
have  put  the  trees  as  far  apart  as  50  x  50,  but  a  majority  have  planted 
at  36  x  36  or  40  x  40.  The  favorite  distance  has  been  36  x  36.  This1 
means  33.6  trees  to  the  acre,  a  number  which  is  far  too  many  to  fit  in 
with  the  best  methods  of  modern  orchard  management.  A  glance  at 
Table  XIX  shows  that  47.9$  of  the  area  has  been  planted  at  36  x  36  to 
40  x  40  feet  apart.  In  young  orchards  set  since  1890,  more  attention 
has  been  given  to  placing  the  trees  at  proper  distances.  None  of  the 
newer  orchards  contained  trees  nearer  than  31  x  31,  while  the  largest 
numbers  were  set  at  35  x  35  or  36  x  36.  It  would  be  much  better 
if  all  the  trees  were  set  40  to  45  feet  apart. 


BULLETIN  262. 


The  distance  between  trees  affects  in  an  important  way  the  thor- 
oughness of  spraying  and  the  character  of  the  fruit.  When  trees  are 
close  together,  it  is  often  difficult  to  spray  from  all  sides,  and  frequently 
impossible  from  the  most  important  side  of  the  tree.  Great  losses 
from  the  effects  of  scale  and  codling  moth  have  been  sustained  because 
of  crowded  trees.  More  room  between  trees  will  facilitate  spraying  and 
tend  to  insure  better  quality  of  fruit. 

XIX.     DISTANCE  BETWEEN  TREES 


DISTANCE  APART. 

TREES  SET  BEFORE  1890. 

TREES  SET  SINCE   1890. 

Number 
orchards. 

Number 
acres. 

Percent 

acres. 

Number 
orchards. 

Number 
acres. 

Percent 
acres. 

i? 

122 
135 
221 
I  2 
4 

6 

171 

I  ,  O4I  2 
I.ISI* 

2,377^ 
144 
28 
52 

3-4 

21.0 
23  -2 
47-9 
2.9 

.6 
i  .  i 

9 

3 
4 

9i 

12 

59 

56.2 

3i: 

26  x  26  to  30  x  30  ft  

36  x  36  to  40  x  40  ft  

4iX4itosoxsoft  ... 

66  x  33  ft  

Trees  set 
before  1890. 

Trees  set 
since  1890. 

Average  number  of  trees  per  acre    

38.2 

36  .  4 

Average  distance  apart  

33.8 

34  •  6 

RENTED  ORCHARDS 

Only  thirteen  and  three-tenths  per  cent  of  the  orchards  are  rented.  Of 
this  number  almost  one-half,  or  forty-six  and  two-tenths  per  cent,  are 
rented  for  five  years  or  more.  The  average  period  of  tenure  is  four 
years.  This  investigation  of  rented  orchards,  and  the  period  of  rental, 
gives  a  much  better  showing  than  was  made  from  computations  in  Wayne 
or  Orleans  County,  and  represents  a  condition  which  is  very  much  as  it 
should  be. 

XX.     ORCHARDS  RENTED  AND  ORCHARDS  WORKED  BY  OWNER 


TENURE. 

Number 
orchards. 

Number 
acres. 

Per  cent 
orchards. 

Rented               

78 

673 

13.3 

Worked  by  owner   

^07 

<c  ,  360 

86.7 

APPLE  ORCHARD  SURVEY  OF  NIAGARA  COUNTY.  313. 

XXI.     YEARS  OF  TENURE 


YEARS  OF  TENURE. 

Number 
orchards. 

Number 
acres. 

P  rcent 
orchards. 

One  year 

15 
14 
J3 

36 

106 
174 
222 
171 

19.2 
18.0 
I6.7 
46  .  2 

Two  years 
Three  and 
Five  or  me 

four  years  

>re  years  

YIELDS,  PRICES  AND  -MARKETS,  AND  INCOME 

Yields. —  Four  tables  are  presented  herewith  which  give  the  essen- 
tials with  respect  to  yields.  The  table  on  yields  for  the  entire  county 
is  only  approximate,  as  is  that  on  average  yields  per  tree.  All  yields 
are  much  reduced  because  of  the  scale  in  the  western  part  of  the  county. 


XXII.    APPROXIMATE  TOTAL  YIELD  IN  BUSHELS  FOR  ENTIRE  COUNTY 

1889  (U.  S.  Census  Report) 623  ,  204 

1899  (U.  S.  Census  Report) 1,421,  796 

1902 3.445.°°° 

1903 4, 622, 200 

1904 4, 428,600 


I9°5 


3,751 ,000 


1906 4, 124,000 

The  estimates  for  the  last  five  years  are  only  approximate. 


XXIII.     AVERAGE  YIELD  PER  ACRE  IN  BUSHELS 


YEAR. 

Number 
orchards. 

Number 
acres. 

Average 
yield. 

IQO2  .  . 

12  ^ 

IQO'?  .  . 

*-0 

273 

2     776 

230 

IQO4.  . 

A  CQ 

197 

100=;.  . 

•3  72 

J95 

17-7 

a55 

j.  /y 

The  average  yield  for  the  five-year  period  is  192.4  bushels,  which  is 
29  bushels  less  than  was  found  for  Orleans  County,  and  34  more  than 
was  found  for  Wayne  County. 


BULLETIN  262. 


XXIV.     AVERAGE  YIELD  PER  TREE 

1902 6.2  bushels 

i9°3  • 5.2  bushels 

i9°4 5.1  bushels 

i9°5 4.1  bushels 

i9°6 4-7  bushels 

Average , 5.0  bushels 

These  results  were  obtained  by  dividing  the  average  yields  per  acre 
(Table  XXII)  by  the  average  number  of  trees  per  acre,  which  is  38.2. 
This  average  yield  per  tree  is  two-tenths  of  a  bushel  more  than  was 
found  for  Orleans  County,  and  is  one  and  four-tenths  more  than  in 
Wayne. 

XXV.     CLASSIFICATION  OF  YIELDS 


I9O2. 

1903. 

1904. 

YIELD  PER  ACRE 
IN  BUSHELS. 

Num- 

Num- 

Per 

Num- 

Num- 

Per 

Num- 

Num- 

Per 

ber  or- 

ber 

cent  or- 

ber or- 

ber 

cent  or- 

ber or- 

ber 

cent  or- 

chards. 

acres. 

chards 

chards. 

acres. 

chards. 

chards. 

acres. 

chards. 

o—  100  

3  2 

33° 

35.2 

3  2 

389 

8.7 

84 

899 

33    9 

101-200  

36 

443 

39-6 

288 

695 

77-8 

102 

i  ,  132 

41  .  i 

201-300  

8 

88 

8.8 

25 

326 

6.8 

29 

285 

TI.7 

3OI  —  4OO.      .  . 

I  2 

1  15 

13      2 

*9 

163 

5    i 

8    i 

4OI  —  SOO  

2 

1  5 

1  .  2 

3 

29 

.8 

I    I 

104 

4  •  4 

5OI  —  6OO  

2 

8 

.  5 

I 

83 

^ 

6 

6 

QOI-IOOO  

— 

•  















CLASSIFICATION  OF  YIELDS 


VTPT  Ti    PT?T?     APP~R 

1905. 

i 

306. 

IN   BUSHELS. 

Number 
orchards. 

Number 
acres. 

Per  cent 
orchards. 

Number 
orchards. 

Number 
acres. 

Per  cent 
orchards. 

Five-year 
average 
per  cent 
orchards. 

212 

2     4l6 

S3 

200 

2,348 

45  -5 

35  .  2 

148 

138 

i   694 

31   4 

45  -4 

201-300  

18 

208 

4-5 

ll 

558 
1  20 

13  .2 
3    6 

1.6 

4OI—5OO  

4 

20 

i 

6 

74 

1  .  4 

2 

160 

.  5 

28 

•  Q 

.5 

6OI—7OO  

4 

14 

i 

.0 

.6 

18 

82 

g 

7 

APPLE  ORCHARD  SURVEY  OF  NIAGARA  Co 


Prices  and  markets. —  The  table  given  below  shows  the  average  prices 
for  the  crops  as  they  were  marketed  for  the  different  years.  The  averages 
for  1905  an.l  1906  were  based  on  a  smaller  number  of  computations 
than  for  any  of  the  other  years ;  still  they  are  representative  for 
the  county  for  those  years. 

XXVI.     AVERAGE  PRICE  PAID  TO  GROWER 


HOW  MARKETED. 

1902. 

1903- 

1904. 

1905. 

1906. 

Price  per  barrel  »  .  . 
Price  per  bushel  sold  in  bulk 

$2     00 

18 

$i   82 

3  5 

$2     32 
28 

$2    18 

$1     56 

Price  per  100  pounds  sold  to  dry  

29 

3  5 

3° 

42 

33 

Price  per  100  pounds  for  cider  

20 

24 

Niagara    County    apples   go   to   a   cosmopolitan    market.      Some    find 
immediate   markets   in   the   large   cities   of   the   state,    such   as   Buffalo, 

Rochester,  and  New 
York,  but  still  larger 
quantities  go  to  more 
general  markets  in 
the  Middle  West.  A 
few  growers  store 
their  fruit  and  retail 
in  winter  at  Buffalo 
and  Niagara  Falls  ; 
but  the  bulk  of  the 
apples  is  sold  to  the 
highest  bidding  com- 
mission man.  Very 
few  growers  reported 
any  price  for  cider 
or  vinegar  apples. 
Such  markets  are 
not  worth  while. 

Under  normal  con- 
ditions the  bulk  of 
apples  in  the  county 
is  handled  in  the 

apple  barrel.     Up  to 
[G.   39. —  Result  of  a  bad  crotch.      Three  hmbs  were 

started  from  same  place,   and  when  heavy  each  has      hve     vears     a£°>     tne 
split  off.  sorting  table  and  the 


BULLETIN  262. 


apple  barrel  were  the  characteristic  features  of  the  apple  industry.  But 
with  the  introduction  and  spread  of  the  scale,  important  changes  have 
occurred.  Since  1902,  the  cider  mill  and  the  evaporator  have  come  to 
the  fore.  In  1902,  only  .9$  of  the  apples  went  to  the  evaporator.  In 
1903,  this  had  increased  to  2.8$;  in  1904,  it  was  still  increasing,  and  had 
run  up  to  about  7.3$;  while  in  1905,  the  evaporator  claimed  34.1$  of 
the  crop.  This  seemed  to  be  the  climax,  for  in  1906,  the  evaporated  por- 
tion had  fallen  to  27.1$. 

There  have  been  three  chief  causes  for  the  production  of  so  much 
inferior  fruit :  The  apple  scab,  the  codling  moth,  and  the  San  Jose 
scale.  In  1905,  there  was  considerable  scab  on  apples,  but  since  then 
there  has  been  but  little.  There  is  considerable  loss  every  year  from 
codling  moth.  But  the  most  potent  factor  is  the  scale,  which  is  a  pro- 
lific feeder  of  the  evaporating  factory. 

Outside  of  the  scale-infested  area  different  conditions  prevail.  Take, 
for  instance,  the  year  of  1905,  when  our  field  notes  were  the  most  com- 
plete, and  another  aspect  is  presented.  Our  records  for  that  year 
show  that  in  the  eastern  part  of  the  county  the  evaporator  received 
only  three  per  cent  of  the  crop,  whereas  for  the  entire  county  in  the 
same  year  thirty-four  per  cent  went  to  the  dry-house.  Similar  con- 
trasts might  be  constructed  for  other  years.  The  time  seems  ripe,  then, 
for  a  fuller  recognition  of  the  importance  of  fighting  the  scale,  and 
every  effort  should  be  made  to  destroy  this  pest.  Every  apple  grower 
who  allows  scale  to  breed  in  his  orchard  should  feel  that  he  is  not  only 
injuring  his  own  business,  but  helping  to  stigmatize  the  character  of 
the  whole  county. 

XXVII.     DISPOSAL  OF  THE  CROP 


HOW  MARKETED. 

1902. 

1903. 

1904. 

Bushels. 

Per  cent. 

Bushels. 

Per  cent. 

Bushels. 

Per  cent. 

188,692 
33,622 

2  ,OSO 

84.1 
15-0 
•  9 

381,712 
90,606 
13,645 
500 

78.S 
18.6 

2.8 

.  i 

419,890 
85,059 
39,726 
384 

77.0 
15.6 
7-3 
.  i 

Sold  in  bulk                    

Otherwise  disposed  of  

APPLE  ORCHARD  SURVEY  OF  NIAGARA  COUNTY. 


317 


HOW  MARKETED. 

190 

5. 

190 

5. 

Bushels. 

Per  cent. 

Bushels. 

Per  cent. 

Sold 

in  barrels  

125   043 

57   8 

67  & 

Sold 

8    i 

Sold 

7-1    ^gg 

Income  per  acre. —  The  information  gathered  on  this  point  is  displayed 
in  two  tables.  One  shows  the  average  gross  income  per  acre  for  each 
of  the  five  years.  The  general  average  for  the  five-year  period  is 
$109.20  per  acre.  This  is  $16  less  per  acre  than  was  found  for  Orleans 
County.  The  second  classification  shows  how  these  incomes  are  dis- 
tributed with  reference  to  the  number  of  orchards  and  number  of  acres 
under  each  group.  The  grower  will  find  it  interesting  to  study  these 
tables  with  reference  to  his  own  orchard. 

XXVIII.     AVERAGE  GROSS  INCOME  PER  ACRE 


IOO2 

$112  OO 

IQO3  . 

129  .OO 

08  oo 

I  QO  ^ 

103  oo 

IOO6  .  . 

IO4.OO 

General  average  for  the  five-year  period $109 .  20 

XXIX.     CLASSIFICATION  OF  INCOMES 


INCOME  PER  ACRE. 

1902. 

T903. 

1904. 

Number    Number 
orchards.1     acres. 

Number 
orchards. 

Number 
acres. 

Number 
orchards. 

Number 
acres. 

o—  25 

16 
10 
23 
33 
33 
35 

21 
28 
IS 
27 

30 

21 

31 
4 

161 
96 
302 
315 
32? 
585 
5" 
3M 
269 
542 
560 
883 

345 
375 

22 

55 
58 
69 
79 
So 
Si 

11 

13 
4 
5 
4 
17 

8 

246 
457 
593 
643 
828 
557 
369 
744 
796 
112 
262 
32 
57 
351 

437 

7i 
104 

72O 
126 
XIO 

98 

68 
16 
14 
19 
II 
4 

5 
ii 

2 

2 
II 

704 
1,131 
i  ,  146 
1,241 
1,281 
1,113 
560 
147 
278 
547 
327 
35 

34 
400 
10 

21 

437 

26—  50  

51—   75                  •    • 

76—100  

101—125...,  

1  76—200  

226—250  

25  1—275  

301—3  25  

3  76—400  

— 



— 



I 

16 
IS 

Over  500  

BULLETIN  262. 

CLASSIFICATION  OF  INCOMES 


INCOME  PER  ACRE. 

1905- 

1906. 

Five-year 
average 
per  cent 
orchards.  (a) 

Number 
orchards. 

Number 
acres. 

Number 
orchards. 

Number 
acres. 

10 
118 
82 
108 
7o 
23 
29 

.     10 

34 
6 

i 

21 

931 
978 
953 

784 
255 
582 
207 
280 
249 

7 
4 

98 

IOO 

79 
43 

T5 

25 

42 
16 

20 

6 

i 
i 

i 

804 
718 
890 
673 
171 
445 
404 
213 

Hi 

12 
10 

4 

5-5 
14.  i 
14.0 
15-2 
12.3 
8.1 
7-1 
5-6 
4.6 
3-1 
2.3 
1.8 
.5 
2.5 
.8 
.4 
•9 
I  .  i 

.  2 

26—   <:o   

151—175  

226—250  

35  1—3  75  

426—450  

Over  450 

(a)  Less  than  five  years  in  a  few  cases. 


FIG.  40, — A  sample  of  good  pruning,  showing  the  healing  process  well  under  way 


APPLE  ORCHARD  SuRvW  •*di';NrAiGAtfA:Gdt}NTY".'-  319 

SUMMARY 

Extent  of  the  survey. —  During  the  summers  of  1905,  1906  and  1907, 
over  716*  orchards  containing  6,000  acres  were  canvassed  in  Niagara 
County.  There  are  approximately  24,200  acres  set  to  apples.  Repre- 
sentative districts  all  through  the  county  were  examined. 

Age  of  the  trees. — A  majority  of  the  orchards  were  planted  thirty  to 
forty-five  years  ago.  Five  and  four-tenths  per  cent  were  set  out  before 
1850,  81.1  per  cent  were  planted  between  1850  and  1879,  and  13.6  per 
cent  since  1880.  During  the  past  seven  years,  the  scale  has  deterred 
many  from  planting  orchards,  but  the  decreased  plantings  began  twenty- 
seven  years  ago,  and  the  acreage. has  been  on  the  decline  since  1880. 

Soils. —  The  Dunkirk  loam  and  the  Dunkirk  clay  loam  are  the  best 
soils  for  apple  production.  Clyde  loam  gives  the  lowest  yields.  Too 
little  attention  has  been  given  to  drainage,  and  much  loss  has  been 
sustained  because  of  this  neglect. 

Drainage. —  Fifty-two  and  two-tenths  per  cent  of  the  orchards  have 
good  drainage,  about  twenty-six  per  cent  have  fair  drainage,  and  about 
eleven  per  cent  have  poor  drainage.  About  eleven  per  cent  have  locally 
bad  drainage.  A  little  money  spent  in  draining  the  orchard  land  would 
prove  a  good  investment. 

Fertilization. —  Barnyard  manure  is  used  more  itihan  any  other  fer- 
tilizer. Sixty-one  per  cent  of  the  orchards  receive  manure,  about  four 
per  cent  are  given  commercial  fertilizer,  and  about  twenty-two  per  cent 
are  not  fertilized  at  all.  Cover-crops  are  used  to  the  extent  of  nearly  ten 
per  cent. 

Tillage. — Approximately  fifty-one  per  cent  of  the  orchards  have  been 
tilled  for  five  or  more  years,  and  twenty-eight  and  nine-tenths  per  cent 
have  been  in  sod  for  the  same  time.  Five-year  averages  show  larger 
yield  and  greater  income  for  tilled  than  untilled  orchards.  The  per- 
centage of  tilled  orchards  seems  to  be  on  the  increase,  for  in  1905  fifty- 
two  per  cent  of  the  orchards  were  tilled.  There  are  many  sod  orchards 
that  are  well  cared  for.  Of  the  sod  orchards,  those  not  pastured  have 
given  the  largest  average  yields.  Where  pasturing  has  been  practiced, 
hog  treatment  has  proved  the  best. 

Enemies  of  the  apple. —  During  the  last  six  years  the  scale  and  cod- 
ling moth  have  been  the  worst  enemies  of  the  apple.  Collar  rot  is  bad 
only  in  sections,  and  generally  on  poorly  drained  land.  More  attention 
must  be  given  to  spraying  to  insure  good  quality  of  fruit. 

Spraying* — About  four-fifths  of  the  orchards  are  generally  sprayed. 
The  presence  of  the  scale  has  made  very  little  difference  in  spraying 


*  Includes  135  orchards  not  embraced  in  Table  I  on  page  288. 


320  BULLETIN  262. 

practices,  although  it  has  increased  the  kinds  of  spray  mixtures  used. 
Very  few  of  the  scale-infested  orchards  have  been  treated  with  scale- 
killing  mixtures.  Paris  green  with  Bordeaux  has  been  most  generally 
used.  When  averages  are  considered,  there  seems  to  be  a  definite  rela- 
tion between  spraying  and  yield  and  income.  However,  this  does  not 
hold  with  four  sprayings,  probably  because  of  other  disturbing  factors. 
Unsprayed  orchards  give  an  average  yield  of  261  bushels,  with  an  aver- 
age income  of  $45  per  acre.  One  spraying  gives  364  bushels,  and  an 
income  of  $93  per  acre.  Two  sprayings  yield  509  bushels,  and  give 
$101.  Three  sprayings  carry  the  yield  to  577  bushels,  and  the  income 
to  $171.  The  largest  number  of  orchards  and  the  greatest  number  of 
acres  are  given  two  sprayings  per  year.  In  well-cared-for  orchards, 
the  maximum  yield  comes  with  three  sprayings;  but  the  maximum  in- 
come follows  four  sprayings. 

Pruning. —  In  sixty-six  and  seven-tenths  per  cent  of  the  orchards  com- 
pared as  to  character  of  pruning,  the  pruning  is  good  or  fair,  in  twenty- 
five  and  three-tenths  per  cent  it  is  poor  or  neglected,  while  in  eight  per 
cent  no  pruning  is  done.  Effective  and  profitable  spraying  is  impossible 
where  insufficient  pruning  is  done.  More  pruning  and  greater  regularity 
of  the  work  must  be  adopted  in  order  to  fight  successfully  the  serious 
pests. 

Distance  between  trees. —  The  average  distance  between  trees  is  33  8 
feet.  The  favorite  distance  is  36  x  36.  Nearly  half  of  the  orchards  were 
set  from  36  x  36  to  40  x  40.  In  forty-seven  per  cent  of  the  orchards 
the  trees  are  too  close. 

Rented  orchards. —  Very  few  orchards  have  been  rented.  Only  thir- 
teen and  three-tenths  per  cent  have  been  held  by  tenants  during  recent 
years,  and  of  these  forty-six  and  two-tenths  per  cent  have  been  let  out  for 
at  least  five-year  periods. 

Yields. —  The  average  yields  per  acre  have  been :  1902,  236  bushels ; 
I9°3>  J97  bushels;  1904,  195  bushels;  1905,  155  bushels;  1906,  179 
bushels.  The  average  for  the  five  years  is  192.4  bushels. 

Prices. —  The  average  prices  per  barrel  have  been:  1902,  $2.00;  1903, 
$1.82;  1904,  $2.32;  1905,  $2.18;  1906,  $1.56. 

Income  per  acre. —  The  average  gross  incomes  per  acre  .have  been : 
1902,  $112;  1903,  $129;  1904,  $98;  1905,  $103;  1906,  $104.  The  general 
average  for  the  five  years  is  $109.20. 

Varieties. — About  thirty  kinds  of  apples  are  grown  in  the  county. 
Rhode  Island  Greening,  Baldwin  and  Northern  Spy  are  the  chief  vari- 
eties. Russets,  King,  Tolman,  Twenty-ounce  and  Hubbardston,  how- 
ever, are  grown  to  considerable  extent. 


YC  62073 


